Book Review of Hitchcock/Truffaut by Francios Truffaut (1983)

                Hitchcock/Truffaut. Francois Truffaut. New York, NY:                             Simon and Schuster Paperbacks, 1983. 367 pages.


                                        By Patrick Charsky


    In the future when Cinema as we know it is something far different from what it is today, Historians will look back on the Golden Age of Cinema and find one of their key texts will be Hitchcock/Truffaut by François Truffaut. Written by an essential director of the French New Wave about the most famous British director of Film’s first Golden Age, the book is a treasure trove of information about how to make films, what makes a film a success and the life and times of the Master of Suspense; Sir Alfred Hitchcock. Hitchcock/Truffaut presents Sir Alfred’s long career of hits and misses with a discussion about the Master Director’s methods for creating timeless masterpieces and forgotten misfires.

Hitchcock/Truffaut is not a biography. There is little background to Hitch’s personal life or upbringing. The book focuses on Hitch’s filmmaking career and how he made his films. Hitchcock/Truffaut came about from Truffaut’s idea to get down Hitch’s views on filmmaking after a long career that reached its climax with Psycho and then declined in the 1970’s and ended with Sir Alfred’s death on April 29th, 1980.

The first question I asked myself before writing this review was what made Hitchcock films Masterpieces? Was there a special formula that Hitch used in his films? When Truffaut began to interview Hitch he stated that many critics of Hitch’s films at the time they were released said his films were “empty” and had “no meaning.” It was only in the 1970’s and 1980’s that Hitch’s critical reputation grew and he became considered a legend. His films influenced many filmmakers, especially those working in the horror or suspense genre.

The reasons why Hitch’s films succeeded have to begin with his technical virtuosity. Hitch aspired to be an engineer before getting into the British Film Industry during the days of Silent film. Throughout the book Hitch goes into great detail about camera setups, shooting films so editing isn’t necessary, and how to get the perfect shot of a scene or sequence. The most famous example is Psycho. In one chapter Hitch talks about how he got the sequence of Norman Bates’ mother killing the detective without showing her face. The shot took a lot expertise not to show Bates’ face and reveal the secret that Norman was dressing up as his mother and murdering people. The camera was suspended above the scene and moved carefully to catch the killing without giving away the conclusion to the audience. A fantastic sequence that shows Hitch’s immense creativity when shooting scenes.

Perhaps the biggest reason Hitchcock’s films succeeded was the use of the star system. In the beginning most of Hitch’s films used famous people from the London stage. When he moved to Hollywood to work with David O. Selznick, Hitch began to use big stars like Ingrid Bergman, Jimmy Stewart, and Cary Grant. His biggest hits used the Star System to his advantage.

The last reason Hitch’s films were a success was the thrilling conclusion. The best of Hitch’s films had the most thrilling conclusions in Film History. Of course there are the most famous; Vertigo, Psycho, but in his other films the conclusions are just as thrilling. In the first talkie of British Cinema, Blackmail, there is a great conclusion. Just as well in Notorious or North by Northwest. Hitch always gave the audience their money’s worth.

During the course of the interview Truffaut would invariably press Hitch for his opinions about why some films just didn’t work. Hitch would always remember each film in intricate detail. Sometimes, Hitch would refuse to talk about a film. Most of the time Hitch blamed poor casting for his film flops. When he couldn’t get a big name actor or actress to play the lead, Hitch would blame that reason for the film's failure. This reason was why Hitch became obsessed in his later years with Ingrid Bergman, Grace Kelly, and Tippi Hedren. Hitch saw them as great components in his machine. Without them it was like missing a cog in his giant wheel.

In his later career Hitch turned dark against his leading women. He says he wasn’t impressed with Kim Novak in Vertigo even though, as Truffaut makes clear, audiences loved her. Further on Hitch became despondent about Grace Kelly’s departure for a royal marriage. In his efforts to replace her he found Tippi Hedren who never rose to Hitch’s standards. It was decisions like these that Hitich obsesses over in his talks with Truffaut about why a picture succeeded or failed.

The last reason Hitch’s films didn’t work were audience changes. Hitch was a commercial filmmaker. He worked in the Film Industry during a time when Film was the dominant form of communication. As the film industry changed, so did Hitch’s fortunes. He bore the difficult times of the 1950’s well, but when the sea change in filmmaking happened in the late 1960’s and through the 1970’s decline inevitably set in. In his defense Hitch was able to cite box office as the reason to keep making films. Psycho was a big success. Hitch could continue to make small stories with low budgets and create a small and tidy profit. By The Birds and his later films, the audience had left. And so had the profit. Whereas Hitch made films that avoided politics or sex or graphic violence; the New Hollywood made films that dealt explicitly with politics and had graphic depictions fo sex and violence.

Film Directors would benefit the most from reading this book. Hitch, after all, was a Director. His ruminations about filmmaking will educate aspiring Directors. His talk about camera techniques, acting, and dealing with source material and writers shed substantial light on how directors work. Film has changed, but Hitch’s lessons still have relevance. His attention to detail, his directing of actors, and his innovative ways of telling simple stories are lessons to be learned by filmmakers.

Writers would also benefit from reading Hitchcock/Truffaut. Hitch talks extensively about finding source material from plays, novels, and newspaper articles. Hitch was not a writer, but the book shows how Directors and Writers collaborate on a film. Lastly Film Historians and film fans who are interested in Hitch’s films and career would enjoy the book. Hitchcock/Truffaut is a treasure trove of information, stories, and advice. This book, like Hitchcock and Truffaut, will remain an essential document about a time when films were the only media in town. When going to a theater was commonplace. Not an event. Hitchcock is gone forever. His films will last an eternity and this book is the best way to engage with his films.