Rate It
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
Not rated. () |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
(2254) |
|
|
|
|
(751) |
|
|
|
|
(1503) |
|
|
If you liked this, then you'll also probably like...
Got another recommendation for someone who liked this movie? Add it to the list!
Got an opinion? Use the buttons to vote on all the suggestions people have added.
If lots of people vote, the best suggestions will rise to the top.
| Click (16%) |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| To Catch a Thief (100%) |
|
|
| Shadow of a Doubt (100%) |
|
|
| Spellbound (100%) |
|
|
| Suspicion (40%) |
|
|
Plot:
A murdering rapist has been terrorizing London. The police manage to track him down and sentence him to life imprisonment. However Inspector Oxford has his doubts as to whether or not they have indeed...( read more
)
Fine black-humored Hitchcock, and a return to his roots after a decade of stumbling about. A "great scenes" movie, and the Anthony Shaffer screenplay keeps things moving. Somewhat dated, as opposed to Hitchcock's great works.
This is a fairly gruesome, explicit latter-day Hitchcock film that's definitely worth watching. It comes off as a welcome surprise in terms of content compared to previous works, and I really liked that. The blacker than black(and British) humor makes it all the more better on top of that.
One of the better Hitchcocks but what is it with the love this guy gets. His movies are so overrated it is sickining.
Overlooked Hitchy masterpiece. I say, his funniest, which naturally coincides with his greatest number of murders.
perhaps superceded by newer films, but this freaked me - the [spoiler alert] framing of the innocent man.
Hitchcock's only R rated film and he didn't hold back. It's good to see a master filmaker well into his seventies still turning out quality work. There are many intense and suspenseful moments that you would expect from a Hitchcock movie, but I was impressed with the artistic use of the camera and sound. It's by far the best film he did since Psycho and the last twenty years of his life.
Well directed (as expected).
Somehow Hitchcock made this film seem very real. Maybe it was the way it was set. Or it might have been the actors taht were chosen. There was no one that stood out as a film star wearing a good suit or an immaculate dress as in some of his other classics. The actors and actresses just looked like ordinary people. One of the killings was quite graphical, but still a lot was left to the audiences imagination.
I thought the final part of the story could have been a little better also...
***MOVIE SPOILER***
The part where that couple are going to help the accused, but then decide to leave and go to France is a little weak.
Hitchcock's use of camera work was great as usual. E.g. when one girl gets killed they follow her up the stairs, but as the flat door shuts the camera begins to descend and zoom out of the building. As if to say we are leaving that character now and you can't help her.
Hitchcock was definitely a Director ahead of his time, just imagine the kind of films he would be directing now if he could.
In Frenzy, Hitchcock builds up the characters before the big part of the story unleashes. A few familer faces, such as Bernard Cribbings, Billie Whitelaw etc.
The plot, I should imaginewas quite sinister in it's day and still makes really good viewing now.
Only movie that made me irritated at the 'Bob's your uncle' phrase. Having been experimented on with amateur cooking, the detective and his wife scenes were especially funny to me.
I feel bad I resisted watching this for so long. After much hype, my dad was not wrong. A brutal, sarcastic, hysterical piece of work.
It also goes to show that Alfred Hitchcock was limited by the censorship of his time period. Man, he would've blown the hinges off the world if he'd been able to. O_O
Consider this one Hitch at his most pornographic. Boobs and bad language that was Hitchcock's own ushering in of the 70's and "modern" film, post-Peckinpah and "Bonnie and Clyde". But then again what's more essentially British than the lace curtain set gossiping about the latest "sex murderers"?
Neither as suspenseful nor witty as Hitchcock in his prime, some scenes seemed more derived from the 3 Stooges than the classic dry wit or wink and nod at the camera that we come to expect and love from Hitchcock. Rather than a step forward, Frenzy seems more of a wallowing in mud of explicit imagery that newly relaxed censorship standards brought about. We'd have to wait before someone could take these new standards and deploy them for cerebral thrills and humor.
There are some classically misogynistic quips, funniest for their sheer inappropriateness and reflection on the times as they were, rather than the intended joke. A worthwhile viewing for Hitchcock fans. We get to see the later phase in our hero-director's career. Also just an interesting time capsule showing the transition between post-war vs. "modern" London.
All in all, if you have a chance to see it, it's entertaining. And if you don't, you're not missing out terribly.
I am surprised that I hadn't seen this before but this is another classic Hitchcock done late in his career.
Hitchcock's penultimate film, the 52nd of his career, shows that even after 50 years as a director, Hitchcock can still make good movies.
This film is filmed in set in England where Hitchcock's career began five decades earlier. It tells the story of a man who rapes and strangles women to death with his tie. This film was rated R and for good reason. The plot is a pretty good murder mystery, although it's not really a mystery. The identity of the murderer is revealed very early on in the film although he is not a suspect as there is substantial evidence against a completely innocent man. For those not afraid of a few scenes that are somewhat graphic and a little swearing, this plot is great.
This film has a few main actors although none of them are all that notable for an American audience. They all do a pretty good job so there's not really anything to complain about.
Like previous Hitchcock films, this one deals with mistaken identity and murder. While this is hardly anything new from Hitchcock, he was able to do things not previously allowed. This film would never get past the censors while the Hays Code was still in effect. Hitchcock was known for his ability to push the Code to the limit, but this film goes far beyond what he did in any of his previous films. While some may say there were moments that were unnecessarily violent or vulgar, I don't think that was the case.
While Hitchcock's film making brilliance was pretty much over once Vertigo, North By Northwest, and Psycho were released in a three year span, this film shows that Hitchcock still had a something left. While nothing he made after the three aforementioned films (with the possible exception of Family Plot which is the only post-1957 Hitchcock film I haven't seen) comes anywhere near the greatness of his earlier works, this film is probably the best of the bunch and worth a watch not just because it's a Hitchcock film.
83/100
B-
UP NEXT: Something with Bogart and Bacall.
Another Alfred Hitchcock classic. Richard Bucket from "Keeping Up Appearances" is in this movie. Better watch the T.V. edited version like I did.
Frenzy is actually one of my least favorite Hitchcock movies, but it's still a good movie overall. Just not deserving of being a classic. The horror/mystery plot is shot very well, but it didn't have enough exciting scenes like the rest of his work.
This is probably the most gruesome looking Hitchcock film, it's got dead bodies, nudity, and an onscreen murder. The story was brilliant, and the actors were great.
Any Hitchcock is worth seeing and this one has its good points but there is an ugliness to it that detracts.
In this movie it will have your tongue hanging out....and not in a good way. Only watched it out of curiosity --one of Hitchcock's last movies.
Not one of his best, but still a very good film. filmed in london and has a very britishy feel about it which is a good thing. Some small comedic moments aswell were fun. remindered me of Jack the Ripper a little bit.
This one will have your tongue hanging out....and not in a good way. Only watched it out of curiosity --one of Hitchcock's last movies. Political incorrectness, 1972 style (or is it 1922?) , abounds.
The darkest side of the genius was fully flourished in this rambunctious, violent, brutal and yet bizarrely amusing thriller. the last great Hitchcock film.
Great, but not Hitchcock's best. A well written plot. The characters are great, the direction is perfect and the storyline is entertaining and builds a good suspense.
Un bon suspense du début à la fin. Une scène géniale : Un travelling arrière dans un escaliers alors qu'une femme vas se faire tuer. La camera fuit la scène. Le brillo d'Hitchcock.
One the most disturbing, fearless movies ever made. This is very modern Hitchcock, he has great movies for every generation he lived.
Alfred Hitchcock's only X-rated movie was Frenzy (1972), and that was only because a few brief nude scenes and because the murderer raped his victims before strangling them with his neck tie. This was his second to last film before he died; and his first British film in almost twenty years. As is typical with Hitchcock's films an innocent man is accused and sentenced, but not to worry things work themselves out. There is quite a bit of humor here; the most famous being the look on the victims' faces after death. The role of the killer was first offered to Michael Caine (two time Oscar winner) who declined. Eventually it went to a Caine look-alike Barry Foster (Twisted Nerve 1968). The rest of the cast includes Jon Finch, Alec McCowen, Barbara Leigh-Hunt and Anna Massey. Watch for Hitchcock's trademark cameo in the opening scenes.
This board looks lonely. Be the first to talk about "Frenzy" !