Hitchcock on Surprise vs. Suspense

In his discussions with Francois Truffaut, found in the book Hitchcock, at one point Hitchcock talks about the differences between surprise and suspense, which I think shows his complete grasp of how an audience watches and reacts to film:

"There is a distinct difference between 'suspense' and 'surprise', and yet many pictures continually confuse the two. I'll explain what I mean.

"We are now having a very innocent little chat. Let us suppose that there is a bomb underneath this table between us. Nothing happens, and then all of a sudden, 'Boom!' There is an explosion. The public is surprised, but prior to this surprise, it has seen an absolutely ordinary scene, of no special consequence. Now, let us take a suspense situation. The bomb is underneath the table, and the public knows it, probably because they have seen the anarchist place it there. The public is aware that the bomb is going to explode at one o'clock and there is a clock in the décor. The public can see that it is a quarter to one. In these conditions this same innocuous conversation becomes fascinating because the public is participating in the scene.

"The audience is longing to warn the characters on the screen: 'You shouldn't be talking about such trivial matters. There's a bomb underneath you and it's about to explode!'

"In the first case we have given the public fifteen seconds of surprise at the moment of the explosion. In the second case we have provided them with fifteen minutes of suspense. The conclusion is that whenever possible the public must be informed. Except when the surprise is a twist, that is, when the unexpected ending is, in itself, the highlight of the story."

No wonder they call him master of suspense!

SUBMARINE (2011)

Hello!
I have returned. I was away for some months and now I am back! To get back in the swing of things, here is the trailer for British comedian Richard Ayoade's film SUBMARINE. I think it looks wonderfully original and kind of evokes some of whimsical Francois Truffaut stylings (even without the soaring French soundtrack that accompanies the trailer). Which is an interesting comparison as it was the late French New Wave director's 79th birthday two days ago. Anyways, back to SUBMARINE, have a look at this terrific trailer!

GUY AND MADELINE ON A PARK BENCH (2010)

So... I've been so busy lately, I haven't been able to post as much as I'd like. We've been working on a short film on which production has wrapped, so now hopefully I'll have some more time to write about some movies! Until then, here is a short trailer for what looks like a great little indie film called GUY AND MADELINE ON A PARK BENCH. Looks pretty neat! Anytime you get some black and white film stock, add some jazzy sensations, mix in some Godard, you've got my attention. Hope this film isn't as superficial as my initial interest is! Ha. But seriously, it looks quite New Wave-y, just look at that tap number which is right out of Godard's A WOMAN IS A WOMAN, or like the dance scene from Truffaut's JULES ET JIM. And that quick shot from a rooftop of someone running down the sidewalk, very French New Wave. So it's got the look of the late 50s/early 60s, does it have the feeling or innovation? I guess we shall have to see!



Directed by: Damien Chazelle

Hitchcock, on Surprise vs. Suspense

They don't call him the Master of Suspense for nothing.
His explanation to Francois Truffaut of surprise versus suspense.


"There is a distinct difference between "suspense" and "surprise," and yet many pictures continually confuse the two. I'll explain what I mean.

We are now having a very innocent little chat. Let's suppose that there is a bomb underneath this table between us. Nothing happens, and then all of a sudden, "Boom!" There is an explosion. The public is surprised, but prior to this surprise, it has seen an absolutely ordinary scene, of no special consequence. Now, let us take a suspense situation. The bomb is underneath the table and the public knows it, probably because they have seen the anarchist place it there. The public is aware the bomb is going to explode at one o'clock and there is a clock in the decor. The public can see that it is a quarter to one. In these conditions, the same innocuous conversation becomes fascinating because the public is participating in the scene. The audience is longing to warn the characters on the screen: "You shouldn't be talking about such trivial matters. There is a bomb beneath you and it is about to explode!"

In the first case we have given the public fifteen seconds of surprise at the moment of the explosion. In the second we have provided them with fifteen minutes of suspense. The conclusion is that whenever possible the public must be informed. Except when the surprise is a twist, that is, when the unexpected ending is, in itself, the highlight of the story."

From Truffaut's exhaustive interviews with Hitchcock, which can be found in the book "Hitchcock-Truffaut: A Definitive Study of Alfred Hitchcock by Francois Truffaut." I love when two filmmakers I love and admire get together to talk shop.

Directors on set

Francois Truffaut (in the back of a 2CV!)

I LOVE each of these pictures. Directors in action. Part of me would be very, very happy to be a set stills photographer for the rest of my life. But when I look at these pictures, I truly know that being a filmmaker is what I want to do. Something about pictures like these spark some kind of excitement and inspiration in me, but it's really hard to pinpoint! I guess it just looks like good fun.

Roman Polanski (behind camera)

Rainer Fassbinder

Otto Preminger

Luchino Visconti

Martin Scorsese (with black goatee and beltbuckle)

Woody Allen (in Gilligan Hat)

Stanley Kubrick (I think this is my favorite.)

David Lynch

Agnes Varda (director of Cleo de 5 a 7)

Federico Fellini (update: No, this is my favorite. Fellini is somehow unbelievably photogenic, how is that?!)

Except for the Francois Truffaut one at the top, these are all from http://www.anneyhall.tumblr.com/

Les 400 Coups (1959)

My sister and I went to see Francois Truffaut's debut feature Les 400 Coups/The 400 Blows last night at the Vancouver International Film Centre. It was presented by Ken Eisner, a writer who often contributes reviews to the Georgia Straight which are often quite funny. Anyways it was a great screening, the print was wonderful, and of course those seats are amazing. It's quite a nice theatre.

As for the film, well, it's obviously excellent. I'd hazard to suggest that if one were going to see only one significant French film from the past, oh, century, then it should probably be The 400 Blows. It's Truffaut's mostly-autobiographical account of 14-year old Antoine Doinel living in 50s Paris who gets into trouble at every turn, mostly due to (often negligent) adults completely misunderstanding what a kid needs. So Doinel gets himself into bad situations, and between his parents, his teachers, and the police, nobody can give him what he needs. The only person he can rely on is his good friend Rene. Their boyish relationship is one of my favorites in cinema, and is just great film about a couple of friends hanging out and often getting up to no good. That's something this film does well, is put itself in the shoes of a kid without feeling condescending.

Many, many people have written about this film, and probably all are more eloquent than myself, so if you know about this film, then there are endless resources out there to get more in-depth. All you need to know to know from me, however, is just go see it. Ideally in a cinema, but if not, make sure you get the Criterion DVD from somewhere. It's fantastic. Gorgeous cinematography, some wonderful music, and extraordinarily naturalistic performances from an astonishing young cast. A number of these actors would return in Truffaut's second feature, Shoot The Piano Player/Tirez Sur Le Pianist.

Like Jean Seberg

I just stumbled upon this a couple weeks ago. (Click here for the whole series) Apparently it is a fairly renowned fashion spread from the 1990s for a couple reasons, Christy Turlington for one, and two, it's an awesome set of photos. But beyond the obvious aesthetics, it's the source material I am interested in. I am a huge fan of the Jean-Lic Godard's French New Wave film A Bout de souffle (it's the picture behind the title of this blog!) and this spread takes all its cues from that film, in particular the character played by the gorgeous Jean Seberg!

Gorgeous.

In the film, Seberg plays Patricia, a young American woman in 1960 Paris, who helps her acquaintance and (sort-of) lover Michel (the now iconic French actor Jean-Paul Belmondo), who is wanted for the murder of a police officer. Michel is determined to have Patricia run away to Rome with him, and he spends a couple days bumping around Paris, avoiding detectives and trying eke out cash from whoever will give him the time of day. Patricia also wanders Paris, pondering the many options and choices her life ahead has in store for her.

Jean-Paul Belmondo.

Seberg's performance is delicate, funny, and introspective. Godard largely had his actors improvise the scenes. He was frequently coming up with new ideas on set, and writing the scenes the morning before filming. What resulted are some really genuine sequences between Seberg and Belmondo; they flirt, they laugh, they fight, and they discuss life.

Breathless.

Unfortuntely, Seberg herself had a fairly sad life. A number of personal problems almost derailed her career, and in the 1970s the FBI concocted a plot to discredit her due to her outspoken political and anti-war views. She also lost a child and had several problematic marriages. In 1979, she disappeared and was found dead in her car several days later at the age of young age of 39. It was largely thought to be a suicide.

Seberg's tragic life makes her performance in A Bout de souffle just that much more powerful. Like Marilyn Monroe, James Dean, and other actors whose lives ended prematurely, there is something eerie and beautiful about her portrayal of Patricia. Patricia is in the same league as Agnes Varda's Cleo. She is ephemeral and she knows it. She looks at the world with curiosity even though she knows her experience is a fleeting one. Characters in the films of the French New Wave often have that fatalistic outlook. They suffer from ennui, a dissatisfaction with the world as it has been passed to them. They look around, they wander, and they examine their surroundings in a constant search for a meaning to their existence.

Along with Francois Truffaut's The 400 Blows, A Bout de souffle is considered the beginning of the French New Wave--le nouvelle vague. These two films and the subsequent films of the movement are creative, fresh, innovative, and playful. The sensations of optimism and opportunity, of exploration and experimentation, are integral to many films of the movement. It was a genuine cry for more, a refusal to accept life as it is handed down, and it gave birth to generations of fascinating and inspiring cinema.