The Girl

Wow! Is that really what happened? In many biographies about Alfred Hitchcock, the most Tippi Hedren ever said about the incident when Alfred Hitchcock supposedly propositioned her was, "Demands were made of me that I could not acquiesce to." But in "The Girl", Toby Jones' Hitchcock puts it right out there when he says to Sienna Miller's Tippi Hedren, "From now on, I want you to make yourself sexually available to me at all times. Whatever I want you to do, whenever I want you to do it."

Possibly it happened that way, Tippi Hedren seems to have been consulted by the filmmakers. My feeling is that where there was that much smoke there had to be fire, but just how fair is "The Girl"?

The movie is nothing less than interesting. Toby Jones is amazing, and Sienna Miller more than holds her own, but opinion over the film is divided. On one side are those outraged that Hitchcock's reputation has been besmirched without a chance to defend himself, while on the other are those outraged at what Hitchcock appears to have done to Tippi Hedren.

"The Girl" relates how Alfred Hitchcock groomed the inexperienced Hedren to star in "The Birds" and "Marnie". During the process, Hitchcock changed from mentor to monster becoming totally obsessed with her. Eventually he made an overt sexual advance. She refused and that was the end of the relationship.

One scene in "The Girl" does undermine it. It's the somewhat salacious screen test where Hitchcock asks Hedren to give Martin Balsam a long lingering kiss. Unfortunately for the makers of "The Girl", the actual test clip is fairly well known from documentaries and YouTube, and is a lot less threatening than the recreation. In reality, Balsam and Hedren actually seem quite comfortable with each other. It was silly to overdo a scene that is so accessible; it leaves you wondering how much over-egging went on with the rest of the custard.

The difference between Hedren and Hitchcock's other leading ladies was that they were better able to handle him. Most were established stars, surrounded by husbands, boyfriends and agents, but Hedren didn't have all that; she was just starting out and was far more vulnerable.

According to some sources, it was about this time that Hitchcock's judgement also seemed to be slipping. The suppressed voyeuristic tendencies and fantasies that helped inform his great films were taking on a harder edge. He now wanted to be explicit in what he showed.

Up until then, the Motion Picture Production Code kept him in check. Would films like "Rear Window", "Vertigo" or even "Psycho" be the enduring classics they are today if Hitchcock had been allowed to go all the way? The censor made him innovative and subtle. However, by the late 60's the Code was gone. No one ever ranks 1972's "Frenzy" among his greatest movies; plenty of rape and nudity on display there. Fortunately he never made "Kaleidoscope"; with what he had planned, it could have been a real legend killer.

As far as "The Girl" is concerned, maybe it's best to just enjoy the show. Toby Jones' Hitchcock is even better than his Truman Capote, genius really, the voice is perfect, and Sienna Miller is so beautiful that you can believe that a fat, old auteur could harbour a fantasy or two about her. But maybe the last words on the subject could be the classic line Hitchcock once directed at an actor who was getting a bit too worked up about things, "Don't worry, it's only a movie".

I stumbled across this one day while scanning through the channels. I saw "Hitchcock" in the description, so I decided to have a look. Now I'll admit, I don't know all that much about Hitchcock. I know he's a great director, but I know next to nothing about his personal life or any controversy that may have lead to this movie. Instead I focused on the movie itself. After watching, I decided to look it up, where I came across the rather large controversy that this film has created. So here's my humble take on the film.

"The Girl" is a brilliant film from a mechanical standpoint. The acting is brilliant. Toby Jones sounds almost IDENTICAL to Hitchcock. It was really quite eerie to listen to the two. He seemed to capture the mannerisms from the director quite well. Sienna Miller was okay, but was a bit dry in some parts. Otherwise it was a fine group of actors. Likewise, directing, cinematography and editing were all exceptional, so why does this film fail?

A question I have instead of all the "is this a true story?" is, if you have all of the makings of a great film-a great cast, a great director, great camera-work-why base the story on such a controversial and doubtful series of events? Why not use the tools you have to make a biopic of sorts? This is what baffles me. If this film had followed a different story, it would probably have a much better rating. Everything points to a successful film EXCEPT the story, so why do it?

I suppose this is the problem with film these days. People are more concerned about the shock factor than an actual quality film. It's a shame too, because this could have been much, much better and free from controversy.

The title should warn you, and if it doesn't then the poster should warn you with the proud foreground stance of the female lead. This isn't a movie for Hitchcock fans. It's a wish-fulfillment movie for women-- in particular, for those who would like to daydream of effortlessly becoming a movie star, beloved by all (as well as being a successful mother who needs no husband to depend on), while maintaining integrity and never buckling under the harassment of piggish men. It even ends by reassuring the daydreamer that given the choice, the wise woman chooses not to pay the price of enduring stardom. Unfortunately, this beauty-and-the-beast tale takes the guise of a true story, and it renders Alfred Hitchcock as not just fat but deformed-- and devoid of understandable motivation. Moreover, there is nothing gradual, subtle, or devious to make his harassment of Tippi Hedren interesting. In a better movie-- a Hitchcockian, gaslight movie-- we would wonder at the beginning whether Hedren were imagining things, and we might even wonder after the end. In this one, though, the story is given no overlay of ambiguity; on the contrary, it is given extra bluntness beyond the known factual version.

This TV movie looks at Alfred Hitchcock's obsession with Tippi Hedren during the making of the Birds.

This is quite fascinating compared to the film "Hitchcock" starring Anthony Hopkins. It shows Hitchcock's obsession with his leading ladies in a more predatory abusive nature than the Hopkins movie. Wonder which is closer to the truth? Sienna Miller doesn't look much like Tippi - she has a harder look but she does a good job. Toby looks more like Hitch than Anthony Hopkins.

Watch "The Birds" first and then watch this. The peek a the behind the scenes creative process is fascinating for Hitchcock fans.

As most film buffs are aware, Alfred Hitchcock was a known voyeur and that kink was evident in most of his films and the Director was able to channel that obsession for creative and successful movies. The art form itself is genuinely, by nature, produced to satisfy the voyeuristic tendencies of the audience. No one knew that better than Hitch.

It is also known that he liked blonds with a cool demeanor. But to just what extent he used his leverage over these actresses was not very clear. According to Tippi Hedren, if we are to believe her accounts, this made for HBO Movie is truth told to power (posthumously).

This is an old Hollywood story that used to be referred to as "the casting couch". Here we have an impotent Hitch groping and demanding obedience "available to me in all i desire", a determined, sad old man, that uses his on set Direction to "torture" her with repeated, dangerous and humiliating takes of a scene in The Birds (1963).

But she is a strong and resilient woman who would make another movie, Marnie (1964) with Alfie and then fade to black. The movie makes its points in a straightforward, blemishes and all, account that is well acted by all and, surprisingly, without any flourishes that made Hitchcock a legendary film maker.

It is a sympathetic portrayal of a beautiful woman and a flawed, fat and ugly, powerful man. A Beauty and the Beast story. Not a pleasant situation about an unpleasant, but talented man.