Hitchcock back in his native land concocting a classic British thriller with a large dose of humor and cruelty. Jon Finch plays the innocent man on the run. Jon Finch ! He was Polanski's Macbeth. A great but uncomfortable presence on the screen. I can't quite explain it. The first time I saw him was in a small but pungent scene as a hustler in John Schlesinger's Sunday Bloody Sunday. In Frenzy he falls in several traps, as a character and as an actor. He doesn't have the lightness nor the charm of a Cary Grant but he has a weight of his own that makes Frenzy truly dark. Anna Massey plays the girlfriend, a part that, apparently, was offered to Helen Mirren in 1972 but she turned down, as a young actress she had her eyes set on Jack Nicholson for instance, feeling that Hitchcock was old hat. Maybe she was right, but I wonder if she regrets it. Billie Whitelew is also in the cast plus Alec McCowen as the Inspector from Scotland Yard and Vivien Merchant as his wife in a delicious Hitchcokian touch. If you're a Hitchcock fan I'm sure you've seen it but if you haven't, you must.
270 Reviews
A truly engaging nail-biter!
mattymatt4ever7 January 2003
Hitchcock did one hell of a job! I was planning on watching this movie just for about 30 minutes before going to sleep and was gonna finish watching it the next day, but instead I was so engaged that I couldn't stop watching and stayed awake the whole 2 hours. I loved the irony of the actual rapist having no clues pointing to him and the innocent man having all clues pointing to him. The scene involving the rapist in the back of the truck, rummaging through a sack of potatoes (and that's all I'll reveal) is classic suspense. I also loved how Hitchcock left the rape scenes (excluding the first one) up to the imagination. There is a great shot where one of the victims is being raped and we don't even hear any off-screen yells or screams. The camera simply tracks backwards down a staircase and out the front door, where people walk by minding their own business, ignorant to the evil that's being committed a floor above. Any amateurish director would've went for true shock value and showed all the rape scenes in explicit detail. We don't call Hitchcock the master of suspense for nothing. The scene is still quite haunting. In horror and suspense, what you don't see can be a lot more frightening than what you do see, since the imagination is a powerful thing. The last line of the movie should go down in history. It had me bawling with laughter! Just that one line gave perfect closure to this wonderful film.
My score: 8 (out of 10)
My score: 8 (out of 10)
Revisiting the Wrong Man
nycritic20 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
After the disaster that TOPAZ represented, Alfred Hitchcock took a three-year hiatus, did an about-face from the United States, and returned to his native England to produce this extremely graphic, violent film which not only made him return full circle to his cinematic origins, but also sent him back to square one -- THE LODGER -- in which a wrong man is accused of a crime he didn't commit. If he had not made FAMILY PLOT it would be a fitting close to a remarkable film career.
Despite the fact that FRENZY is a story about a rapist-murderer laying terror unto London, this is not a mystery by far. From the very beginning we're introduced to the man behind the murders, but also to the man who ultimately comes to be convicted for those very murders -- one of them his very own wife. Hitchcock, of course, loves the dark side of humanity and has expressed a need to tell stories about "the wrong man" as well as explore the natures of depravity hidden underneath a smiling surface, always with his trademark humor. That humor is as black as ever here, seen mainly in the scenes involving the inspector in charge of the investigation of the crimes and his wife (who can't cook to save her life), and especially in the grim sequence when the real killer goes through hell to retrieve his tie-pin which has remained within his latest victim's death grip.
By far the most graphic film in his career, Hitchcock manages to pull some clever camera stunts which service not only the plot, but the sense of voyeurism as an experience. In a great shot, he pulls back from the scene where the killer and his victim enter his apartment, down a flight of stairs, and onto the indifferent streets of London. He's made us witnesses and therefore, accomplices, because he knows we can't do a single thing to save that woman's life.
Despite the fact that FRENZY is a story about a rapist-murderer laying terror unto London, this is not a mystery by far. From the very beginning we're introduced to the man behind the murders, but also to the man who ultimately comes to be convicted for those very murders -- one of them his very own wife. Hitchcock, of course, loves the dark side of humanity and has expressed a need to tell stories about "the wrong man" as well as explore the natures of depravity hidden underneath a smiling surface, always with his trademark humor. That humor is as black as ever here, seen mainly in the scenes involving the inspector in charge of the investigation of the crimes and his wife (who can't cook to save her life), and especially in the grim sequence when the real killer goes through hell to retrieve his tie-pin which has remained within his latest victim's death grip.
By far the most graphic film in his career, Hitchcock manages to pull some clever camera stunts which service not only the plot, but the sense of voyeurism as an experience. In a great shot, he pulls back from the scene where the killer and his victim enter his apartment, down a flight of stairs, and onto the indifferent streets of London. He's made us witnesses and therefore, accomplices, because he knows we can't do a single thing to save that woman's life.
One Potato...Two Potato...Three Potato...Four
BaronBl00d5 March 2001
The grand man of suspense, Alfred Hitchcock, directs this dark film about a man that kills women with neckties with relish, aplomb, and an atypical grimness. The story is typical Hitch as an innocent man is pushed into a world of intrigue around him as everyone believes him to be the necktie killer. Jon Finch plays the innocent with earnestness and is quite good in his role. The rest of the cast is very effective as well. Hithcock, however, is the real star with his camera. Although much of the film is nothing more than tried and true material, Alfred Hitchcock makes the mundane spectacular with his camera and some great shots and spaces of silence. The scene where a girl coming back from lunch is awesome as we the audience are made to wait what seems an eternity for her to discover what has taken place since she left. The scene of the camera moving in and out of the house of the killer is also wonderful, as is the scene with the killer in the potato truck. That scene is easily the most suspenseful of the entire film. The film is particularly dark for Hitchcock as a women is raped rather abruptly(for lack of a better word) showing naked breasts and genuine terror. To counter-balance the more lurid aspects of the film is a subplot story of a police inspector, played with charm by Alec McCowen, whose wife constantly feeds him nothing but gourmet meals that sound and look quite horrible! These scenes are so funny and charming! A good thriller from the master of suspense!
Hitchcock's Final Masterpiece
gftbiloxi8 April 2005
Hitchcock had been in a bit of an artistic slump when, after some thirty years, he returned to England for this, his next to last film--and the result was his final masterpiece.
Scripted with ghoulish humor by Anthony Schaffer, FRENZY opens with a ceremony on the banks of the Thames in which Londoners inaugurate legislation to rid the river of pollutants... only to have the corpse of a naked woman wash ashore in the midst of their celebrations. She has been strangled with a tie--the latest victim of a serial killer who savagely rapes and then murders his victims by twisting his necktie around their throats. With the city in a panic and Scotland Yard desperate to catch the killer, suspicion falls on a down-on-his-luck bartender named Richard Blaney. Trouble is, he isn't the killer.
In a sense, FRENZY has a strangely Dickensian flavor. It is a film that by and large seems to happen in public places: pubs, parks, offices, hotels, and most particularly Covent Garden with its constant hustle and bustle that serves to conceal horrors that occur inches away from the safety of the crowds. Indeed, the city seems almost a "master character" in the film, constantly pressing in upon the humans that inhabit it.
Fans of the British comedy series "Keeping Up Appearances" will recognize Clive Swift in a minor role, but for the most part the cast consists of unknowns--but while they lack name recognition they certainly do not lack for talent, playing with a realism that seems completely unstudied. Leading man Jon Finch (Richard Blaney) is perfectly cast as the attractive but disreputable suspect on the run, and he is equaled by his chum Barry Foster (Robert Rusk.) A special mention must also be made of the two female leads, Anna Massey and Barbara Leigh-Hunt--not to mention the host of supporting characters who bring the entire panorama of the great city to life.
In his earlier films, Hitchcock generally preferred to work by inference, implying danger and violence rather than openly showing it on the screen. PSYCHO broke the mold, and with FRENZY Hitchcock presents a sequence that many believe equals the notorious "shower scene:" a horrific rape and slow strangulation that leaves the viewer simply stunned. But having given us this horror, Hitchcock ups it with a scene in which we see no violence at all: just a camera shot that glides away from an apartment door, down the stairs, through the hall, and out into the busy street... as we shudder with the knowledge that the woman who just entered that apartment door is now being horrifically raped and murdered.
Hitchcock made one more film, a comic wink with twists of suspense starring Karen Black, Bruce Dern, and Barbara Harris called FAMILY PLOT--and it is an enjoyable film in its own right. But it is FRENZY that is the final jewel in the Hitchcock crown, a film to rank among his best. The DVD presentation includes a number of extras--including numerous interviews with the cast--that Hitchcock fans will find fascinating. All in all, FRENZY is fearsome, wickedly funny, and strongly recommended... but not for the faint of heart!
Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer
Scripted with ghoulish humor by Anthony Schaffer, FRENZY opens with a ceremony on the banks of the Thames in which Londoners inaugurate legislation to rid the river of pollutants... only to have the corpse of a naked woman wash ashore in the midst of their celebrations. She has been strangled with a tie--the latest victim of a serial killer who savagely rapes and then murders his victims by twisting his necktie around their throats. With the city in a panic and Scotland Yard desperate to catch the killer, suspicion falls on a down-on-his-luck bartender named Richard Blaney. Trouble is, he isn't the killer.
In a sense, FRENZY has a strangely Dickensian flavor. It is a film that by and large seems to happen in public places: pubs, parks, offices, hotels, and most particularly Covent Garden with its constant hustle and bustle that serves to conceal horrors that occur inches away from the safety of the crowds. Indeed, the city seems almost a "master character" in the film, constantly pressing in upon the humans that inhabit it.
Fans of the British comedy series "Keeping Up Appearances" will recognize Clive Swift in a minor role, but for the most part the cast consists of unknowns--but while they lack name recognition they certainly do not lack for talent, playing with a realism that seems completely unstudied. Leading man Jon Finch (Richard Blaney) is perfectly cast as the attractive but disreputable suspect on the run, and he is equaled by his chum Barry Foster (Robert Rusk.) A special mention must also be made of the two female leads, Anna Massey and Barbara Leigh-Hunt--not to mention the host of supporting characters who bring the entire panorama of the great city to life.
In his earlier films, Hitchcock generally preferred to work by inference, implying danger and violence rather than openly showing it on the screen. PSYCHO broke the mold, and with FRENZY Hitchcock presents a sequence that many believe equals the notorious "shower scene:" a horrific rape and slow strangulation that leaves the viewer simply stunned. But having given us this horror, Hitchcock ups it with a scene in which we see no violence at all: just a camera shot that glides away from an apartment door, down the stairs, through the hall, and out into the busy street... as we shudder with the knowledge that the woman who just entered that apartment door is now being horrifically raped and murdered.
Hitchcock made one more film, a comic wink with twists of suspense starring Karen Black, Bruce Dern, and Barbara Harris called FAMILY PLOT--and it is an enjoyable film in its own right. But it is FRENZY that is the final jewel in the Hitchcock crown, a film to rank among his best. The DVD presentation includes a number of extras--including numerous interviews with the cast--that Hitchcock fans will find fascinating. All in all, FRENZY is fearsome, wickedly funny, and strongly recommended... but not for the faint of heart!
Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer
Exceptional Hitchcock thriller
jhaggardjr25 June 2000
"Frenzy" was Alfred Hitchcock's next-to-last film. And though it's not a great classic like "Psycho" and "North by Northwest", it's still a very good movie. After making mostly American movies for four decades, Hitchcock returned to his native Britain to make "Frenzy". It's about a series of murders that's devastating London. These murders have two things in common: 1) The victims are all women; and 2) they're all raped and then strangled with a neck-tie. When a marriage counselor is murdered this way, the police suspect the woman's ex-husband is the culprit. But actually the husband is innocent, and is forced to hide out from the cops. "Frenzy" has all the usual Hitchcock elements: thrills, suspense, comedy, and Hitchcock's cameo appearence. The two best scenes in the movie are the hilarious moments when the police inspector (who's heading up the investigation of the neck-tie murders) is served two gourmet dinners by his wife. These scenes are very funny. The comic moments is what gives "Frenzy" a edge over Hitchcock's previous film "Topaz". Plus, it's a more entertaining thriller.
*** (out of four)
*** (out of four)
A good if uneven late entry by Hitchcock
AlsExGal14 October 2023
Frenzy follows the misadventures of ex-RAF man Jon Finch, who is framed for a particularly nasty series of 'necktie' murders for which his hot-temper and self-pity do not help..
The more one sees this film, the more holes appear or seem to appear. Finch is supposed to be an ex-squadron-leader with a fine record, but is too young to have done anything in WWII. The original novel came out in 1949 or thereabouts, so a little tweaking should have been in order. The first murder / assault shown seems to be done in rather too much detail and is possibly too lurid. In addition, there doesn't seem to be anything to tie him up with the previous murders.
These grumbles aside (and one could pick a few more holes if required), Frenzy held my attention reasonably well, and although at times it doesn't look too Hitchcockian, there are enough bits to make one aware of his presence. He is ably served by his cast of Barry Foster, Clive Swift (a fellow RAF man, but 'under the thumb'), the late Billie Whitelaw as Swift's acid-tongued wife, Barbara Leigh-Hunt as Finch's successful ex-wife, Anna Massey and Bernard Cribbins, to name a few.
The police are represented by Alec McCowen and Michael Bates, together with a series of running jokes on the frightful dishes McCowen's wife (Vivien Merchant) is serving up as a result of a gourmet course she is attending. This was Hitchcock's first British film in about twenty years, and had a mixed reception. The years have been kind to it, though, and it seems to have become more generally accepted, and there is enough action in it to keep one interested.
The more one sees this film, the more holes appear or seem to appear. Finch is supposed to be an ex-squadron-leader with a fine record, but is too young to have done anything in WWII. The original novel came out in 1949 or thereabouts, so a little tweaking should have been in order. The first murder / assault shown seems to be done in rather too much detail and is possibly too lurid. In addition, there doesn't seem to be anything to tie him up with the previous murders.
These grumbles aside (and one could pick a few more holes if required), Frenzy held my attention reasonably well, and although at times it doesn't look too Hitchcockian, there are enough bits to make one aware of his presence. He is ably served by his cast of Barry Foster, Clive Swift (a fellow RAF man, but 'under the thumb'), the late Billie Whitelaw as Swift's acid-tongued wife, Barbara Leigh-Hunt as Finch's successful ex-wife, Anna Massey and Bernard Cribbins, to name a few.
The police are represented by Alec McCowen and Michael Bates, together with a series of running jokes on the frightful dishes McCowen's wife (Vivien Merchant) is serving up as a result of a gourmet course she is attending. This was Hitchcock's first British film in about twenty years, and had a mixed reception. The years have been kind to it, though, and it seems to have become more generally accepted, and there is enough action in it to keep one interested.
The Master of Suspense nailed it once again.
Sleepin_Dragon29 July 2023
London is terrorised by a serial killer, who rapes and kills his victims by strangling them, known as The Necktie killer. Down on his luck, ex serviceman Richard Blaney is accused, the case against him is strong.
A classic, it's a nail biter, a film that truly will have you on the edge of your seat, it's that good, it defies its age.
This is one of the most memorable Hitchcock films, arguably the best of his later works. Frenzy is without a doubt Hitchcock's most graphic film, it's brutal, it really doesn't hold back.
I'm a huge fan of this film, it is a wonderful storyline, it's intriguing and brutal, it's brought to life by a wonderful cast.
Great to see Hitchcock return to The UK, and there's something about a strangler in London, it has a historical vibe to it.
The use of camera work, music, silence, life carrying on after a tragedy....well what can you say, Hitchcock was The Master of Suspense, but he absolutely nailed every aspect of this film.
If you're a fan of British TV and cinema, you'll recognise a tonne of faces, you'll see Bernard Cribbins, Clive Swift, Anna Massey, Barry Foster,
I'll never be able to watch Van der Valk in the same light again.
Wonderful, 9/10.
A classic, it's a nail biter, a film that truly will have you on the edge of your seat, it's that good, it defies its age.
This is one of the most memorable Hitchcock films, arguably the best of his later works. Frenzy is without a doubt Hitchcock's most graphic film, it's brutal, it really doesn't hold back.
I'm a huge fan of this film, it is a wonderful storyline, it's intriguing and brutal, it's brought to life by a wonderful cast.
Great to see Hitchcock return to The UK, and there's something about a strangler in London, it has a historical vibe to it.
The use of camera work, music, silence, life carrying on after a tragedy....well what can you say, Hitchcock was The Master of Suspense, but he absolutely nailed every aspect of this film.
If you're a fan of British TV and cinema, you'll recognise a tonne of faces, you'll see Bernard Cribbins, Clive Swift, Anna Massey, Barry Foster,
I'll never be able to watch Van der Valk in the same light again.
Wonderful, 9/10.
Hitchcock makes a good early Brian de Palma movie
davidmvining17 August 2020
After the poorly received Torn Curtain and Topaz, Hitchcock returned home to both the murder genre and to Covent Gardens in London to film Frenzy, a lurid tale of a serial killer and the man caught up as the prime suspect. The only feeling of new from the film comes from the use of nudity and a particular focus on the real killer, and yet it's still a solidly built thriller, the sort of thing that Hitchcock could seemingly do in his sleep.
There's a killer on the loose in London, and he has a trademark in that he rapes his female victims and then strangles them with a necktie. In the city is Dick, a former RAF pilot who's had a hard time of it since he left the service, going from job to job and recently divorced. He starts the movie by taking a drink from the pub where he works and immediately getting fired despite his protestations, and the support of his girlfriend Babs, that he was going to pay for it. Without a job, Dick goes to his ex-wife for some kind of support, which he gets through dinner and twenty pounds that she slips into his pocket without his knowledge.
Later, Dick's friend Rusk shows up to Dick's wife's office, a matchmaking service, and demonstrates for the audience, in rather shocking detail, how he is the necktie killer. Now, the reveal of the identity of the serial killer is an interesting twist on the genre. We see Dick and Rusk interacting at several points, events that tell the audience of the danger Dick is putting himself into while he doesn't realize it himself. It's a new version of the tried and true method of creating tension. The other interesting thing about the early reveal is that about half of the movie is from Rusk's own perspective, including the movie's best single sequence.
Rusk has murdered another girl and shoved her body into a potato sack onto a truck. As he returns to his apartment, he realizes that he's lost his pin and that the girl had grabbed onto it. He needs to get back to the body and retrieve the pin, but as he's hiding in the back of the truck, the driver comes and drives off. Rusk has to negotiate the logistics of hiding in the back of a potato truck while digging out a corpse, breaking the fingers on the right hand because of rigor mortis, retrieving the pin, and then getting out again. I can imagine Hitchcock laughing himself silly as he conceived of the scene (not shooting, it seemed like a nightmare to shoot). It's such a twist on the sort of sequence where the bad guy, who's already done the bad dead, is trying to get out of trouble, and the filmmaking is so effective that the audience is along with him, not really cheering him on, but instinctively sharing the same concerns as him.
Another wonderfully amusing aspect of the film, which feels a little disassociated from the rest and gives some pause in terms of praise, is the chief inspector on the case and his wife. The film uses two dinners as springboards for the inspector to explain the police's position at two different points in the film, and instead of just straight exposition the scenes are played out as the wife brings out the most bizarre dishes that look completely inedible. However, since the police inspector is such a polite British man of good manners, he finds ways to get around eating the food he obviously has great distaste for, one of which made my wife cringe audibly as he did it. They're two of the most purely entertaining scenes of exposition in Hitchcock's filmography.
So, yeah, I like it. I do feel like it's a return to form after Topaz, though I seem to like Torn Curtain more than most so it's not like some sort of great gap of quality. One of the drawbacks of the film's approach to treating the two characters, the criminal and the falsely accused, with equal measure is that they end up a bit thinner than they otherwise could be. Dick, in particular, feels like a generic Hitchcock protagonist rather than a strongly written character, especially after the first act when the focus on the actual crimes gets taken up.
It's a gripping little murder thriller set in Alfred Hitchcock's old stomping grounds with some wonderful sequences. It seems to have been a bit overpraised contemporaneously, but that doesn't detract from the fact that it's still a solidly good film.
There's a killer on the loose in London, and he has a trademark in that he rapes his female victims and then strangles them with a necktie. In the city is Dick, a former RAF pilot who's had a hard time of it since he left the service, going from job to job and recently divorced. He starts the movie by taking a drink from the pub where he works and immediately getting fired despite his protestations, and the support of his girlfriend Babs, that he was going to pay for it. Without a job, Dick goes to his ex-wife for some kind of support, which he gets through dinner and twenty pounds that she slips into his pocket without his knowledge.
Later, Dick's friend Rusk shows up to Dick's wife's office, a matchmaking service, and demonstrates for the audience, in rather shocking detail, how he is the necktie killer. Now, the reveal of the identity of the serial killer is an interesting twist on the genre. We see Dick and Rusk interacting at several points, events that tell the audience of the danger Dick is putting himself into while he doesn't realize it himself. It's a new version of the tried and true method of creating tension. The other interesting thing about the early reveal is that about half of the movie is from Rusk's own perspective, including the movie's best single sequence.
Rusk has murdered another girl and shoved her body into a potato sack onto a truck. As he returns to his apartment, he realizes that he's lost his pin and that the girl had grabbed onto it. He needs to get back to the body and retrieve the pin, but as he's hiding in the back of the truck, the driver comes and drives off. Rusk has to negotiate the logistics of hiding in the back of a potato truck while digging out a corpse, breaking the fingers on the right hand because of rigor mortis, retrieving the pin, and then getting out again. I can imagine Hitchcock laughing himself silly as he conceived of the scene (not shooting, it seemed like a nightmare to shoot). It's such a twist on the sort of sequence where the bad guy, who's already done the bad dead, is trying to get out of trouble, and the filmmaking is so effective that the audience is along with him, not really cheering him on, but instinctively sharing the same concerns as him.
Another wonderfully amusing aspect of the film, which feels a little disassociated from the rest and gives some pause in terms of praise, is the chief inspector on the case and his wife. The film uses two dinners as springboards for the inspector to explain the police's position at two different points in the film, and instead of just straight exposition the scenes are played out as the wife brings out the most bizarre dishes that look completely inedible. However, since the police inspector is such a polite British man of good manners, he finds ways to get around eating the food he obviously has great distaste for, one of which made my wife cringe audibly as he did it. They're two of the most purely entertaining scenes of exposition in Hitchcock's filmography.
So, yeah, I like it. I do feel like it's a return to form after Topaz, though I seem to like Torn Curtain more than most so it's not like some sort of great gap of quality. One of the drawbacks of the film's approach to treating the two characters, the criminal and the falsely accused, with equal measure is that they end up a bit thinner than they otherwise could be. Dick, in particular, feels like a generic Hitchcock protagonist rather than a strongly written character, especially after the first act when the focus on the actual crimes gets taken up.
It's a gripping little murder thriller set in Alfred Hitchcock's old stomping grounds with some wonderful sequences. It seems to have been a bit overpraised contemporaneously, but that doesn't detract from the fact that it's still a solidly good film.
Hitchcock effects an awesome comeback with his penultimate film
brchthethird15 August 2015
This. This is more like it. After the last few Hitchcock films left me wanting a little, FRENZY returns to the type of film that he did so well. The plot is one that he frequently used: an innocent man wrongly accused, but he didn't just rehash old material. He upped his game and brought his filmmaking style into a more modern sensibility, all while maintaining the suspense and black humor that had become his trademarks. While I've yet to see any of the films from his British period, I am aware that FRENZY hearkens back to his first real success, which was THE LODGER. And in terms of what I've actually seen, I noticed a lot of DNA from earlier efforts like SABOTEUR, REAR WINDOW, and PSYCHO. The film grabs you and sucks you in from the opening notes of its title sequence, a fanfare which triumphantly announces that he's back: back in his native England, and back in top form. And it wastes no time in thrusting you into this familiar, yet slightly changed world. One thing that benefits the film a lot is the screenplay by Anthony Shaffer, which is filled with great dialogue and biting wit. There was also a sinister, Victorian elegance to the score. And, as with all of his other films, there are a few sequences which stand out. The best of these is probably a long, continuous shot which pulls back from the scene of a crime as Hitchcock leaves it (and its aftermath) to the audience's imagination. Still, perhaps in concession to the changing times, this film does contain some nude scenes and somewhat more vicious-minded, if not particularly graphic, violence. It reminds us that the gory details are often best left to the imagination; they're the icing on the cake, and not the cake itself. Another audacious thing Hitchcock does is make the protagonist rather unlikeable and have us sympathize (at least in one protracted scene) with the villain. Overall, I thought that he was in top form here, adeptly mixing suspense and comedy, all while exploring his favorite themes of sex, death, and food. In regards to food, the Chief Inspector's wife has perhaps a couple of the funniest scenes in the whole film. For me, FRENZY was a welcome return to form after the last few misfires, and it's great that Hitch seems to be going out on top.
Tense and thrilling Hitch's film about his usual theme : the wrong man
ma-cortes29 August 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Tension/suspense/mystery abounds in this thriller from Hithcock who combines his ordinary elements. A down-of-luck man named Richard (Jon Finch) is accused of killing , he frees for his wrongful conviction and is helped by his lover (Anna Massey). Covent Garden wholesale fruit merchant is the real serial killer who strangles women with a necktie. Meanwhile a Chief Inspector (Alec McCowen) along with his sergeant helper (Michael Bates) are investigating the grisly murders . And the strangler killer going on his murder spree . The panic expands on the city by the necktie murderous and Richard becomes a prime suspect . Bewildered Richard chased cross London by the police who think he is an assassin as his ex-wife (Barbara Leigh-Hunt) has been also murdered and all caught by the circumstantial evidence . Later on , Richard learns the real murderer and he's headed to seek revenge against him.
All typical Hitch themes are here as a man wrongly accused of murder , his Quintaessential issue , numerous amazing camera shots and slightly black humor . Hitchcock was encouraged to return to England and promptly made this unusual film for his eventual British period. The picture packs tension , thriller,suspense and excitement. The intriguing story written by Anthony Shaffer -Sleuth- is one of the splendid thrillers with 'false guilty ' as its theme, achieving the maximum impact on the audience and containing numerous exciting set pieces with usual Hitchcock elements . The movie is full of lingering images as when the camera shows the astounding killings , the strange fighting with a corpse in a truck load of potatoes , the camera descending from a first floor flat , the Inspector 's mealtime along with his wife Vivien Merchant , among others . However , it contains some nudism and disturbing scenes as the unsettling rape, strangling and murder scenes. Colorful cinematography by Gilbert Taylor showing marvelously the Covent Garden streets. Suspenseful and enjoyable musical score by Ron Goodwin . This good thriller by the master himself, who preys on the senses and keeps the suspense at feverish pitch . The movie is directed after ¨Marnie(64)¨and ¨Topaz(69)¨his worst movie, subsequently made ¨Frenzy¨ and ¨Family Plot¨ his last film. Rating : Better than average, worthwhile seeing thanks some Hitch's touches.
All typical Hitch themes are here as a man wrongly accused of murder , his Quintaessential issue , numerous amazing camera shots and slightly black humor . Hitchcock was encouraged to return to England and promptly made this unusual film for his eventual British period. The picture packs tension , thriller,suspense and excitement. The intriguing story written by Anthony Shaffer -Sleuth- is one of the splendid thrillers with 'false guilty ' as its theme, achieving the maximum impact on the audience and containing numerous exciting set pieces with usual Hitchcock elements . The movie is full of lingering images as when the camera shows the astounding killings , the strange fighting with a corpse in a truck load of potatoes , the camera descending from a first floor flat , the Inspector 's mealtime along with his wife Vivien Merchant , among others . However , it contains some nudism and disturbing scenes as the unsettling rape, strangling and murder scenes. Colorful cinematography by Gilbert Taylor showing marvelously the Covent Garden streets. Suspenseful and enjoyable musical score by Ron Goodwin . This good thriller by the master himself, who preys on the senses and keeps the suspense at feverish pitch . The movie is directed after ¨Marnie(64)¨and ¨Topaz(69)¨his worst movie, subsequently made ¨Frenzy¨ and ¨Family Plot¨ his last film. Rating : Better than average, worthwhile seeing thanks some Hitch's touches.
Good return to form for Hitchcock
grantss25 April 2014
A good return to form for the master of suspense, Alfred Hitchcock. Since The Birds in 1963 Hitchcock's movies (Marnie, Torn Curtain and Topaz) had not met with commercial success (though, personally, I think Marnie was great).
Frenzy sees Hitchcock back to doing what he does best - suspenseful murder dramas. Great, intriguing plot with the usual clever direction from Hitchcock. Some of his camera angles and exterior shots are straight from his own book of how imply something and create tension without saying a word, or using manipulative music.
The movie also has some great comedic moments. The Chief Inspector and his wife having dinner were always hilarious.
Much more edgy in terms of nudity and sex than any previous Hitchcock movies. This could be ascribed to censorship restrictions being relaxed. Also tells you what Hitchcock could have done with is movies if all the stupid, puritanical censorship wasn't there all along.
Not as tightly wound as his greats (Rear Window and Psycho especially), so not perfect as far as suspense and enthrallment goes.
Good performance by Jon Finch in the lead role. Good support from Alec McCowen, Barry Foster, Anna Massey and Barbara Leigh-Hunt.
Sadly, this was to be Hitchcock's penultimate movie. His final movie, Family Plot was released four years later, in 1976. He died in 1980.
Frenzy sees Hitchcock back to doing what he does best - suspenseful murder dramas. Great, intriguing plot with the usual clever direction from Hitchcock. Some of his camera angles and exterior shots are straight from his own book of how imply something and create tension without saying a word, or using manipulative music.
The movie also has some great comedic moments. The Chief Inspector and his wife having dinner were always hilarious.
Much more edgy in terms of nudity and sex than any previous Hitchcock movies. This could be ascribed to censorship restrictions being relaxed. Also tells you what Hitchcock could have done with is movies if all the stupid, puritanical censorship wasn't there all along.
Not as tightly wound as his greats (Rear Window and Psycho especially), so not perfect as far as suspense and enthrallment goes.
Good performance by Jon Finch in the lead role. Good support from Alec McCowen, Barry Foster, Anna Massey and Barbara Leigh-Hunt.
Sadly, this was to be Hitchcock's penultimate movie. His final movie, Family Plot was released four years later, in 1976. He died in 1980.
Where's Your Necktie?
TheAnimalMother1 December 2012
When it comes to making films, Alfred has made some of the best ever. Frenzy is regarded by many to be Hitchcock's last great film. For me however I feel his best days were long behind him by the time Frenzy was made, and I'm not alone here. This is a good film in plenty of ways. Good enough for a 7.5 out of 10 in my view. To me however it doesn't stand beside classics like Rope, The Birds and Vertigo. Frenzy is definitely worth watching, but overall it falls far short of Hitch's best works. The film is solid in most aspects, but the thrill is not what you may hope for with a Hitchcock suspense piece, but there is enough comedy mixed in to still make it an enjoyable picture.
7.5/10
7.5/10
Just as bad as ever. . .
Critical Eye UK22 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Greeted with derision by most critics when it first appeared, 'Frenzy' has recently done the rounds of UK TV. I remember seeing it on its original release, and thinking then that if Hitchcock wanted to parade some kind of screen confession about his ingrained misogynism, he couldn't have found a nastier little vehicle to do so.
But Time alters perspective, and so what was nauseatingly bad in 1972 might, all these years later, be worthy of upward re-evaluation.
Might. . . but not. 'Frenzy' is dross. The dross of an ageing director who desperately wanted to exploit the artistic freedom of 70s movie making without seeming to realise that freedom imposes its own obligations -- notably, the need to bring integrity to one's work.
There's none here. And not much evidence of the earlier directorial brilliance, either -- the switch from spine-tingling implicit to odious explicit is neither shocking nor, for a supreme stylist, stylish: it's just banal (the prolonged murder scene is precisely that: prolonged, without pace, without reason, without purpose other than the cheapest of directorial desires to appear as contemporary an artiste as, say, that other acclaimed practitioner of cheap sleaze, Michael Winner).
And it goes from bad to worse, with dialog that defies any human provenance (not least in the ludicrous diversion into the Home Life of Our Dear Wooden Inspector, and his wife's cooking).
Perhaps the scene that best sums up 'Frenzy' (and endures as the most explicit indictment of Hitchcock's persona) is the clunking exchange between two lawyers in a bar, where they discuss the serial killings and then agree that at least the women had a good time first by being raped.
I remember my revulsion at that scene back in '72, and it's still undimmed, because this wasn't Hitchcock being clever, or sardonic, or trying to make some universal point (big themes, big truths, were not Hitchcock's forte, nor personal preference.) It was just Hitchcock, allowing a reflection of his own distorted mirror on life to shine through the texture of the movie.
Calling 'Frenzy' Hitchcock's last great masterpiece is to betray little if any understanding of just what Hitchcock actually achieved in the way of cinematic trickery, cinematic thrills, and dazzling cinematic mastery.
'Frenzy' is therefore now what it always was: a cheap, nasty, and ham-fisted movie that did no service to any of those involved, or to the memory of a film-maker who really was, in his Hollywood days, one of the greatest there has ever been.
But Time alters perspective, and so what was nauseatingly bad in 1972 might, all these years later, be worthy of upward re-evaluation.
Might. . . but not. 'Frenzy' is dross. The dross of an ageing director who desperately wanted to exploit the artistic freedom of 70s movie making without seeming to realise that freedom imposes its own obligations -- notably, the need to bring integrity to one's work.
There's none here. And not much evidence of the earlier directorial brilliance, either -- the switch from spine-tingling implicit to odious explicit is neither shocking nor, for a supreme stylist, stylish: it's just banal (the prolonged murder scene is precisely that: prolonged, without pace, without reason, without purpose other than the cheapest of directorial desires to appear as contemporary an artiste as, say, that other acclaimed practitioner of cheap sleaze, Michael Winner).
And it goes from bad to worse, with dialog that defies any human provenance (not least in the ludicrous diversion into the Home Life of Our Dear Wooden Inspector, and his wife's cooking).
Perhaps the scene that best sums up 'Frenzy' (and endures as the most explicit indictment of Hitchcock's persona) is the clunking exchange between two lawyers in a bar, where they discuss the serial killings and then agree that at least the women had a good time first by being raped.
I remember my revulsion at that scene back in '72, and it's still undimmed, because this wasn't Hitchcock being clever, or sardonic, or trying to make some universal point (big themes, big truths, were not Hitchcock's forte, nor personal preference.) It was just Hitchcock, allowing a reflection of his own distorted mirror on life to shine through the texture of the movie.
Calling 'Frenzy' Hitchcock's last great masterpiece is to betray little if any understanding of just what Hitchcock actually achieved in the way of cinematic trickery, cinematic thrills, and dazzling cinematic mastery.
'Frenzy' is therefore now what it always was: a cheap, nasty, and ham-fisted movie that did no service to any of those involved, or to the memory of a film-maker who really was, in his Hollywood days, one of the greatest there has ever been.
Hitch back in London
michelerealini29 February 2004
After 30 years in the USA and after the disappointments of "Torn Curtain" (1966) and "Topaz" (1969), Alfred Hitchcock came back to his native Britain for this film -written by Anthony Shaffer from a novel by Arthur La Bern.
"Frenzy" is his penultimate movie, certainly the best one of his last period. The way the Master films is very classic -deliberately old fashioned; at the same time all the charachters are very modern -they belong to a more and more decadent and neurotic London.
Almost from the beginning we know who the criminal is, and Hitchcock enjoys himself in showing how the man tries to escape and how he betrays people. Director's trademarks are also back in force: suspense (a lot!) and humour -more sarcastic and sharper than ever.
For "Frenzy" the Master doesn't get movie stars, instead he chooses local stage actors. In my opinion he does this because, first, he wants the film to be very English. Furthermore, he wants this time more ordinary faces for making the story more shocking (with famous actors in the main roles, the plot -in a certain way- could be identified mostly with them and loose strength, instead Hitchcock avoids that "paradox"...).
Maybe "Frenzy" is not an unforgettable masterpiece like "Psycho", "Vertigo", "Birds" or many other works. But it is a great movie indeed.
"Frenzy" is his penultimate movie, certainly the best one of his last period. The way the Master films is very classic -deliberately old fashioned; at the same time all the charachters are very modern -they belong to a more and more decadent and neurotic London.
Almost from the beginning we know who the criminal is, and Hitchcock enjoys himself in showing how the man tries to escape and how he betrays people. Director's trademarks are also back in force: suspense (a lot!) and humour -more sarcastic and sharper than ever.
For "Frenzy" the Master doesn't get movie stars, instead he chooses local stage actors. In my opinion he does this because, first, he wants the film to be very English. Furthermore, he wants this time more ordinary faces for making the story more shocking (with famous actors in the main roles, the plot -in a certain way- could be identified mostly with them and loose strength, instead Hitchcock avoids that "paradox"...).
Maybe "Frenzy" is not an unforgettable masterpiece like "Psycho", "Vertigo", "Birds" or many other works. But it is a great movie indeed.
Hitchcock's last good film
preppy-31 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
There's a necktie murderer running around London. He attempts to rape women (he can't he's impotent) and, in his rage, strangles them with his ties. A "nice" guy named Rusk (Barry Foster) is the killer but his best friend Richard (Jon Finch) is the one accused of it...
Hitchcock's first (and last) film in London since the 1950 "Stage Fright". Something about London seemed to rejuvenate him--his two movies before this ("Topaz" and "Torn Curtain") were slow, uninvolving and deadly dull. This moves quickly, has a good script and large doses of VERY black humor--much blacker than Hitchcock had ever attempted before. The film was also Hitchcock's first to get an R rating for a pretty explicit rape/strangulation and flashes of female nudity. To be honest, it's pretty tame by today's standards but still disturbing. It's kind of surprising that Hitchcock would get so vicious...but "Psycho"s shower stabbing was considered shocking for its time as was the scissors killing in "Dial M for Murder".
The acting varies wildly. Mostly everybody is very good--especially Foster, Jean Marsh (in a amusing small role) and Anna Massey. But Finch, as the main character, is terrible. He is handsome but his character is brutal, obnoxious and his acting is just horrendous. That drags the movie down as I didn't care for him at all.
The movie also contains many incredibly-directed sequences--especially the potato truck sequence and a reverse shot sequence. Also it has an infamous--and very funny--final line.
Bad acting from Finch aside this is a good movie and worth catching. I give it an 8.
Hitchcock's first (and last) film in London since the 1950 "Stage Fright". Something about London seemed to rejuvenate him--his two movies before this ("Topaz" and "Torn Curtain") were slow, uninvolving and deadly dull. This moves quickly, has a good script and large doses of VERY black humor--much blacker than Hitchcock had ever attempted before. The film was also Hitchcock's first to get an R rating for a pretty explicit rape/strangulation and flashes of female nudity. To be honest, it's pretty tame by today's standards but still disturbing. It's kind of surprising that Hitchcock would get so vicious...but "Psycho"s shower stabbing was considered shocking for its time as was the scissors killing in "Dial M for Murder".
The acting varies wildly. Mostly everybody is very good--especially Foster, Jean Marsh (in a amusing small role) and Anna Massey. But Finch, as the main character, is terrible. He is handsome but his character is brutal, obnoxious and his acting is just horrendous. That drags the movie down as I didn't care for him at all.
The movie also contains many incredibly-directed sequences--especially the potato truck sequence and a reverse shot sequence. Also it has an infamous--and very funny--final line.
Bad acting from Finch aside this is a good movie and worth catching. I give it an 8.
Mr. Rusk, you're not wearing your tie.
film-critic16 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
For being developed and released in the year 1972, this is a very impressive film. Frenzy, directed by Alfred Hitchcock, gives us one of the last glimpses into the mind of one of our greatest cinematic geniuses. While his style in this film is a bit different than what you may expect from seeing his earlier films, Frenzy is still a complete and utter Hitchcockian thriller. From the opening shot, to the uncanny cameo, to the swiftly tilting plot, anyone who has witnessed Hitchcock at his best will be able to see the mastery behind this film. The acting is superb and only helps to accentuate the brilliant eye that Hitchcock had to give us just what we came asking for. While he gives us a story that we may all be familiar with, it is the way in which he tells the story that makes Frenzy worth mentioning to friends and family.
The genius about this film is that instead of having your usual murder mystery that Hollywood has reproduced a thousand times, Hitchcock balances this story between our hero and villain. In complete Hitchcock form, he tells us, the audience, whom the murderer is right from the beginning so that we do not sit in our seats trying to bend our minds over whom it truly is doing this evil deed. He does this so that we can focus on the insanity of being the "wrong" man and the sadistic pleasure the other finds from not being in the police spotlight. He does this will sheer delight and the brilliance of a true filmmaker. What is continually enthralling about this is that we, the audience, are still kept on the edge of our seat. We know who the murderer is, we know why he is doing this, yet we still bite our nails and wonder how it will turn out. You do not see films of this caliber any more. Even at the end, Hitchcock has us guessing what will happen next up until the final credits roll. He does not allow us a break, and for that I am grateful.
There were some incredible scenes in this film that left a lasting impression on me as well as my idea of film. For example, the way that Hitchcock filmed the rape scene early in the film was shocking, powerful, and very risky for its time. Here we have a man, repeating the same monstrous words to a woman that he has forced himself on, while she repeats the inner voice inside of her out towards us. It sent a shiver down my spine like no other scene of this nature had. It was graphic, yet honest. It was raw, yet somehow cinematic ally intense. I had never seen a scene filmed like this in the past, so this was a sheer bold and stunning. Another scene that literally caught my eye was the moment when Babs leaves the bar, pauses, and right behind her is Rusk. The irony was killing me. It was so macabre that you couldn't help but laugh at the situation that was about to unfold. I felt that same way when I was watching Rusk with the potato sack. While I did think the length of the scene was a bit too much and at times a bit over-dramatic, I did see why Hitchcock left it in there. He was literally giving you the light side of serial killing, the parts that should perhaps make you smile, but instead they have this deeply rooted dark underbelly that keeps your hands firmly in front of your eyes or behind a pillow. It is frightening to think how Hitchcock could have changed the face of cinema today if he were alive to wave his magic wand. It would be powerful.
Outside of the brilliant man behind the camera and the fascinating way to tell an age old story, I thought that the actors did a decent job with what they were handed. While I think that the Golden Globe was mostly for Hitchcock himself, I was pleasantly surprised with Jon Finch's character portrayal and the suave coolness of Barry Foster. I thought that both of these actors did an exceptional job of counterbalancing the story. One was truly evil, while the other just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Both controlled their roles with ease, but then again, with Hitchcock behind the camera, a story like this should just fall into place.
While I have spoken very highly of this film, there were some small moments where I just felt Hitchcock could have gone further, pulled back, or just found the point instead of rummaging around a potato truck for it. That scene in particular did it for me. It was way too long and a bit too humorous for my liking. Also, the nudity was not needed in this film. I don't remember seeing a Hitchcock film with so much nudity, and I understand he was just trying to keep his films fresh for the 70s, but something can be said for style and class, and I felt there was just a bit of both lacking from this film. Outside of these small bits, the rest was flawless. I especially loved the court scene where all we had to rely on was the emotions of the convicted. Finally, who couldn't laugh at the fact that the only one to mess up the life of Blaney, to see the truth blurred and hypothetical, was the secretary that wore glasses. Ahh, it was good to see that Hitchcock has not forgotten all of his roots.
Overall, this was a very dark and disturbing picture that has captured the essence of originality and suspense. You need to see this film more than once to fully absorb everything that Hitchcock has to offer.
Grade: **** out of *****
The genius about this film is that instead of having your usual murder mystery that Hollywood has reproduced a thousand times, Hitchcock balances this story between our hero and villain. In complete Hitchcock form, he tells us, the audience, whom the murderer is right from the beginning so that we do not sit in our seats trying to bend our minds over whom it truly is doing this evil deed. He does this so that we can focus on the insanity of being the "wrong" man and the sadistic pleasure the other finds from not being in the police spotlight. He does this will sheer delight and the brilliance of a true filmmaker. What is continually enthralling about this is that we, the audience, are still kept on the edge of our seat. We know who the murderer is, we know why he is doing this, yet we still bite our nails and wonder how it will turn out. You do not see films of this caliber any more. Even at the end, Hitchcock has us guessing what will happen next up until the final credits roll. He does not allow us a break, and for that I am grateful.
There were some incredible scenes in this film that left a lasting impression on me as well as my idea of film. For example, the way that Hitchcock filmed the rape scene early in the film was shocking, powerful, and very risky for its time. Here we have a man, repeating the same monstrous words to a woman that he has forced himself on, while she repeats the inner voice inside of her out towards us. It sent a shiver down my spine like no other scene of this nature had. It was graphic, yet honest. It was raw, yet somehow cinematic ally intense. I had never seen a scene filmed like this in the past, so this was a sheer bold and stunning. Another scene that literally caught my eye was the moment when Babs leaves the bar, pauses, and right behind her is Rusk. The irony was killing me. It was so macabre that you couldn't help but laugh at the situation that was about to unfold. I felt that same way when I was watching Rusk with the potato sack. While I did think the length of the scene was a bit too much and at times a bit over-dramatic, I did see why Hitchcock left it in there. He was literally giving you the light side of serial killing, the parts that should perhaps make you smile, but instead they have this deeply rooted dark underbelly that keeps your hands firmly in front of your eyes or behind a pillow. It is frightening to think how Hitchcock could have changed the face of cinema today if he were alive to wave his magic wand. It would be powerful.
Outside of the brilliant man behind the camera and the fascinating way to tell an age old story, I thought that the actors did a decent job with what they were handed. While I think that the Golden Globe was mostly for Hitchcock himself, I was pleasantly surprised with Jon Finch's character portrayal and the suave coolness of Barry Foster. I thought that both of these actors did an exceptional job of counterbalancing the story. One was truly evil, while the other just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Both controlled their roles with ease, but then again, with Hitchcock behind the camera, a story like this should just fall into place.
While I have spoken very highly of this film, there were some small moments where I just felt Hitchcock could have gone further, pulled back, or just found the point instead of rummaging around a potato truck for it. That scene in particular did it for me. It was way too long and a bit too humorous for my liking. Also, the nudity was not needed in this film. I don't remember seeing a Hitchcock film with so much nudity, and I understand he was just trying to keep his films fresh for the 70s, but something can be said for style and class, and I felt there was just a bit of both lacking from this film. Outside of these small bits, the rest was flawless. I especially loved the court scene where all we had to rely on was the emotions of the convicted. Finally, who couldn't laugh at the fact that the only one to mess up the life of Blaney, to see the truth blurred and hypothetical, was the secretary that wore glasses. Ahh, it was good to see that Hitchcock has not forgotten all of his roots.
Overall, this was a very dark and disturbing picture that has captured the essence of originality and suspense. You need to see this film more than once to fully absorb everything that Hitchcock has to offer.
Grade: **** out of *****
A necktie murderer! Not one of Hitch's best but a watch for it's interesting story and suspense.
blanbrn31 March 2009
Just watched "Frenzy" from 1972 and clearly it's not one of Hitchcock's better films, in fact unless you are probably a die hard Alfred fan you may not even have heard of it. Still the film has enough suspense blended in with raw humor(especially the dead body being in potato sacks scene!) and wit to make it a watch. Plus the plot and story is interesting enough to make the viewer think a little bit. The setting was London, England for one of Hitchcock's last films the city is all of a sudden terrorized as a sadistic and crazy killer is preying on women leaving them dead. His method is to leave them them totally nude stripped of clothing and he leaves the necktie around their necks after he has strangled them! It starts off with Jon Finch as a fired bartender Richard who's down in the dumps as many think he could be the killer as he's accused falsely he must prove his innocence. Watch for the Barry Foster character a man who's shady with plenty to hide and he will have his true colors revealed. Overall nothing great the good story and suspense still makes it a watch for Hitchcock fans. So check it out if you haven't.
Grim
Spleen12 July 1999
Warning: Spoilers
You should be warned that "Frenzy" has one of the most gruesome rape/murder scenes ever filmed - beautifully filmed, of course, so that you don't look away, but that makes it all the more terrible. It's followed by one of Hitchcock's great signature shots, as the camera draws back, out of the building, into the crowded and noisy streets, where the scene of the crime becomes just one room among many. That's "Frenzy" for you. It's one of Hitchcock's most assured and gripping films; but it's pretty grim. Everyone in London looks surprisingly ugly. Their characters, from hero to villain, are a trifle uglier too. But don't expect a happy ending. Things go just a little bit past the point where a happy ending is possible.
Efficient if often dubious later Hitchcock
BJJManchester5 October 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Alfred Hitchcock's penultimate film,and his final British-made vehicle,FRENZY was something of a step-up from his previous effort TOPAZ,but still somewhat below his highest standards.It is also without question the most explicit and graphic film the master was to direct in his long career,and although fairly innocuous by today's standards (the profanities used would usually pass muster now in PG-orientated movies),there are a few scenes which still cause disturbing frisson's,but not always for the right reasons.
The plot,consisting of an aggressive,vindictive former military man,Richard Blaney (Jon Finch) who is jailed after being mistaken for a sex killer (including the murder of his estranged wife),but vows revenge on the real culprit,a former friend and market trader Bob Rusk (Barry Foster) has been done in scores of variations before and since,but despite the limited scope available with this story,Hitchcock still manages some of his distinctive touches,notably a beautifully filmed tracking shot travelling away from Rusk's flat as he is about to ensnare another victim,Barbara (Anna Massey),a blackly humorous and bizarre sequence involving Rusk's inept attempts at retrieving his tie-pin from Barbara's hand (now heavily in rigor mortis) on a moving truck;several minutes before he had disposed of the body by placing it in a potato sack and throwing it on to the said wagon, before realising where this incriminating piece of evidence was.There is plenty of decent light relief,mostly involving the case's investigative policeman Inspector Oxford (Alec McCowen),who very reluctantly has to endure his wife's awful endeavours at gourmet cooking while gradually realising that Rusk is the real murderer,not the now incarcerated Blaney.
As has been noted,the most contentious sequence in FRENZY is the rape/strangulation murder,involving Rusk and Mrs.Blaney (Barbara Leigh-Hunt).Despite undeniable technical excellence and effective direction,I have always felt extremely uneasy about this scene,which is certainly the most graphic and brutal in a Hitchcock film,even compared to Janet Leigh's famous shower in PSYCHO and Paul Newman's brutal disposal of Wolfgang Kieling in a farmhouse kitchen in TORN CURTAIN.The rape and strangulation in FRENZY is properly shocking but also veers into being gratuitously nasty and voyeuristic.There was similar controversy the previous year with Sam Peckinpah's STRAW DOGS, when Susan George was raped in identical gross detail.At least she managed to survive that horrific ordeal;Hitchcock here doesn't give the character of Mrs.Blaney that privilege,and the legendary director lingers on the final act of strangulation and killing rather too much and too unpleasantly,ending with a brief and gruesome freeze frame of Barbara Leigh-Hunt's tongue sticking out in harrowing detail.The unsettling nature of the sequence is made all the more disconcerting as Mrs.Blaney had easily been the most sympathetic of the characters we had seen in the film to that point.Miss Leigh-Hunt's fine performance as a decent,gentle-minded and good-natured woman trapped by terrible circumstance,first in a doomed marriage to a boozy,abrasive,bad-tempered army type,and secondly dying in the most horrid way imaginable make us feel deeply for her character.It is also interesting to note that in a documentary interview he gave about the filming of this sequence,Barry Foster himself duly admitted to feeling decidedly uncomfortable while enacting it all.
Most of the other cast come off well too,with a fine turn by Alec McCowen as the senior copper Oxford,effectively serious in his detection mode but amusingly sardonic when having to observe the inedible cuisinal non-delights concocted by his wife,also well played by Vivien Merchant.Barry Foster is chillingly convincing and plausible as the evil and depraved sex killer Rusk.Superficially he is very charming,well dressed and witty,until his sadistic and wicked nature is revealed.Hitch perhaps intentionally provides irony here,as the true villain played by Foster is in someways far more personable and likable than the innocent man accused of his killings,Jon Finch.Finch's performance as Blaney is so relentlessly unsympathetic and boorish that we never really care what fate has in store for him,even though it is clear early on that he isn't capable of such degenerate acts.As stated,this may have been intended as irony on Hitchcock's part,but the film becomes unbalanced as a result and we are confused as to who he really sees as the hero of FRENZY.Other reliable British performers such as Anna Massey,Billie Whitelaw,Clive Swift,Bernard Cribbins and Jean Marsh are adequate but again not especially sympathetic characters;the only truly personable character on show (as played by Barbara Leigh-Hunt) is as already specified,viciously slayed early on.
The lack of any congenial characters in FRENZY is a considerable negative point,as is the venomously depicted rape and murder scene to a slightly lesser extent.The film's overall quality would not have suffered had Hitchcock elected to expel this sequence from the script or editing room.Because of this,FRENZY does not tend to linger pleasantly in the memory as classics like NORTH BY NORTHWEST and REAR WINDOW,or even his darker,more Gothic efforts like PSYCHO and THE BIRDS.On the other hand,we can be grateful that Hitch's genius,even when still not operating at 100%,can still produce some striking visual and aural moments,and deft handling of humorous interludes.FRENZY is still generally efficient Hitchcock in spite of it's numerous blemishes.
RATING:6 and a Half out of 10.
The plot,consisting of an aggressive,vindictive former military man,Richard Blaney (Jon Finch) who is jailed after being mistaken for a sex killer (including the murder of his estranged wife),but vows revenge on the real culprit,a former friend and market trader Bob Rusk (Barry Foster) has been done in scores of variations before and since,but despite the limited scope available with this story,Hitchcock still manages some of his distinctive touches,notably a beautifully filmed tracking shot travelling away from Rusk's flat as he is about to ensnare another victim,Barbara (Anna Massey),a blackly humorous and bizarre sequence involving Rusk's inept attempts at retrieving his tie-pin from Barbara's hand (now heavily in rigor mortis) on a moving truck;several minutes before he had disposed of the body by placing it in a potato sack and throwing it on to the said wagon, before realising where this incriminating piece of evidence was.There is plenty of decent light relief,mostly involving the case's investigative policeman Inspector Oxford (Alec McCowen),who very reluctantly has to endure his wife's awful endeavours at gourmet cooking while gradually realising that Rusk is the real murderer,not the now incarcerated Blaney.
As has been noted,the most contentious sequence in FRENZY is the rape/strangulation murder,involving Rusk and Mrs.Blaney (Barbara Leigh-Hunt).Despite undeniable technical excellence and effective direction,I have always felt extremely uneasy about this scene,which is certainly the most graphic and brutal in a Hitchcock film,even compared to Janet Leigh's famous shower in PSYCHO and Paul Newman's brutal disposal of Wolfgang Kieling in a farmhouse kitchen in TORN CURTAIN.The rape and strangulation in FRENZY is properly shocking but also veers into being gratuitously nasty and voyeuristic.There was similar controversy the previous year with Sam Peckinpah's STRAW DOGS, when Susan George was raped in identical gross detail.At least she managed to survive that horrific ordeal;Hitchcock here doesn't give the character of Mrs.Blaney that privilege,and the legendary director lingers on the final act of strangulation and killing rather too much and too unpleasantly,ending with a brief and gruesome freeze frame of Barbara Leigh-Hunt's tongue sticking out in harrowing detail.The unsettling nature of the sequence is made all the more disconcerting as Mrs.Blaney had easily been the most sympathetic of the characters we had seen in the film to that point.Miss Leigh-Hunt's fine performance as a decent,gentle-minded and good-natured woman trapped by terrible circumstance,first in a doomed marriage to a boozy,abrasive,bad-tempered army type,and secondly dying in the most horrid way imaginable make us feel deeply for her character.It is also interesting to note that in a documentary interview he gave about the filming of this sequence,Barry Foster himself duly admitted to feeling decidedly uncomfortable while enacting it all.
Most of the other cast come off well too,with a fine turn by Alec McCowen as the senior copper Oxford,effectively serious in his detection mode but amusingly sardonic when having to observe the inedible cuisinal non-delights concocted by his wife,also well played by Vivien Merchant.Barry Foster is chillingly convincing and plausible as the evil and depraved sex killer Rusk.Superficially he is very charming,well dressed and witty,until his sadistic and wicked nature is revealed.Hitch perhaps intentionally provides irony here,as the true villain played by Foster is in someways far more personable and likable than the innocent man accused of his killings,Jon Finch.Finch's performance as Blaney is so relentlessly unsympathetic and boorish that we never really care what fate has in store for him,even though it is clear early on that he isn't capable of such degenerate acts.As stated,this may have been intended as irony on Hitchcock's part,but the film becomes unbalanced as a result and we are confused as to who he really sees as the hero of FRENZY.Other reliable British performers such as Anna Massey,Billie Whitelaw,Clive Swift,Bernard Cribbins and Jean Marsh are adequate but again not especially sympathetic characters;the only truly personable character on show (as played by Barbara Leigh-Hunt) is as already specified,viciously slayed early on.
The lack of any congenial characters in FRENZY is a considerable negative point,as is the venomously depicted rape and murder scene to a slightly lesser extent.The film's overall quality would not have suffered had Hitchcock elected to expel this sequence from the script or editing room.Because of this,FRENZY does not tend to linger pleasantly in the memory as classics like NORTH BY NORTHWEST and REAR WINDOW,or even his darker,more Gothic efforts like PSYCHO and THE BIRDS.On the other hand,we can be grateful that Hitch's genius,even when still not operating at 100%,can still produce some striking visual and aural moments,and deft handling of humorous interludes.FRENZY is still generally efficient Hitchcock in spite of it's numerous blemishes.
RATING:6 and a Half out of 10.
His Type of Woman
claudio_carvalho3 December 2009
In London, a serial-killer is raping women and then strangling them with a neck tie. When the reckless and low-class with bad temper bartender Richard Blaney (Jon Finch) is fired from the pub Global Public House by the manager Felix Forsythe (Bernard Cribbins), he decides to visit his ex-wife Brenda (Barbara Leigh-Hunt), who owns a successful marriage agency. Her secretary Miss Barling (Jean Marsh) overhears an argument of the couple, and Brenda invites Richard to have dinner with her in a fancy restaurant. Then she put some money in his overcoat and does not tell him to avoid his embarrassment with the situation. Meanwhile Richard's friend Bob Rusk (Barry Foster) visits Brenda in her office, rapes her and kills her with his neck tie. When Richard finds the money in his pocket, he visits Brenda but finds the agency closed; then he goes with his girlfriend Babs Milligan (Anna Massey) to an expensive hotel. Miss Barling sees Richard leaving the building and finds her boss strangled; she calls the New Scotland Yard and Richard becomes the prime suspect. When Bob kills Babs, he frames Richard that is arrested and sentenced to life. But the Chief Inspector Oxford (Alec McCowen) that was in charge of the investigation is not absolutely sure that Richard is the serial-killer.
"Frenzy" is a dark thriller of Alfred Hitchcock about an impotent man that strangles women after raping them. There are powerful moments, like for example the rape of Breda, blended with funny sequences, like the dinners of Inspector Oxford with his wife, who is intuitive and aspirant chef, or the speech of a politician in the very beginning, or Bob in trouble with the corpse in the truck transporting potatoes. The acting is excellent and the camera work is wonderful, with long shots, like for example when Babs enter in Bob's apartment, associated to a disturbing silence. This time, the cameo of Alfred Hitchcock is in the crowd twice in the beginning of the film wearing a hat. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "Frenesi" ("Frenzy")
"Frenzy" is a dark thriller of Alfred Hitchcock about an impotent man that strangles women after raping them. There are powerful moments, like for example the rape of Breda, blended with funny sequences, like the dinners of Inspector Oxford with his wife, who is intuitive and aspirant chef, or the speech of a politician in the very beginning, or Bob in trouble with the corpse in the truck transporting potatoes. The acting is excellent and the camera work is wonderful, with long shots, like for example when Babs enter in Bob's apartment, associated to a disturbing silence. This time, the cameo of Alfred Hitchcock is in the crowd twice in the beginning of the film wearing a hat. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "Frenesi" ("Frenzy")
A good - and occasionally great - Hitchcock film
Jeremy_Urquhart26 August 2022
Tonight was the first time revisiting this in a number of years. My local cinema had it as part of a double feature with Hitchock's Psycho. Funnily enough, they're probably the director's most violent and/or sleazy movies, so they did make for a solid double feature, even if Psycho is definitely the better film. I counted four people leaving Frenzy before it was over, and there may have been more, given I was sitting closer to the front than the back.
But I think they were missing out, because this is still a pretty good film, and one that gets better in its second half, versus its first. It does take a really long time to get going, the tone's a bit all over the place at first, the main character is really unlikeable (which could be a turn-off to some), and most of the better scenes are saved for later on, when things really kick off. I think there's a lengthy scene near the end involving a truck carrying a bunch of potatoes that represents Hitchcock at his best, and also, the fact it gets really comedic (sometimes in a dark way) the more it goes on makes it stand out.
There are some big problems when it comes to pacing, some plot elements that feel a little questionable, and a really grimy setting and incredibly bleak humour that wouldn't work for all. I can't say it entirely works for me either, but Frenzy is still a movie I like quite a bit, and I think it's impressive he was still making movies like this into his 70s. It's certainly worth a watch for fans of his more well-known Hollywood movies.
But I think they were missing out, because this is still a pretty good film, and one that gets better in its second half, versus its first. It does take a really long time to get going, the tone's a bit all over the place at first, the main character is really unlikeable (which could be a turn-off to some), and most of the better scenes are saved for later on, when things really kick off. I think there's a lengthy scene near the end involving a truck carrying a bunch of potatoes that represents Hitchcock at his best, and also, the fact it gets really comedic (sometimes in a dark way) the more it goes on makes it stand out.
There are some big problems when it comes to pacing, some plot elements that feel a little questionable, and a really grimy setting and incredibly bleak humour that wouldn't work for all. I can't say it entirely works for me either, but Frenzy is still a movie I like quite a bit, and I think it's impressive he was still making movies like this into his 70s. It's certainly worth a watch for fans of his more well-known Hollywood movies.
Hitchcock's Final underrated thiller
Marwan-Bob31 May 2021
so-so at best....
tripper01 August 2001
Frenzy is an okay movie. It is really mediocre for the majority however, with a few strokes of genius and interest here and there. The genius refers mostly to a tracking shot(which was absolutely fantastic) from the killers steps and back across the street as he is committing his crime. The other is a scene in the back of a potato truck that was very interesting. There are also a few scenes between the main detective and his wife that were quite amusing. These are really the only decent parts of the movie however, and it really lags and is not all that interesting during the moments between these. Great potential, but fails to create the Hitchcock suspense and intrigue that I enjoy. Unless you're a fan, don't bother. 6 out of 10.
Top director but cheap junk
g-hbe16 October 2006
Oh dear - quite how Alfred Hitchcock (North by Northwest, Spellbound, the 39 Steps) could turn out this nasty, cheapjack shocker is beyond me. Don't bother looking for hidden depths or deep meanings - there aren't any. This is just horrid, seedy and cheap. The one redeeming feature is the home-life of the inspector who leads the investigation - his wife fancies herself as a gourmet cook and constantly serves up her revolting culinary experiments to her poor husband. This is amusing, and just about saved me putting the film in the 'awful' bracket, but the film as a whole is one of the most unpleasant I've ever seen. I believe this was Hitchcock's next-to-last film - perhaps someone was trying to tell him something.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
