I am showing this clip to my film class. Thank you for the example of how narration can really mess up this beautifully shot opening sequence. :) Thank you.
A fascinating little gem here. More than just illustrating how narration can ruin a scene, I think you've managed to highlight something that huge numbers of filmgoers (and far too many film MAKERS) fail to understand - the essential DIFFERENCE between the media. If you close your eyes and listen to the words, you can understand how Woolrich "painted" the scene, because that's the way you SHOW something on the printed page. Hitchcock translated that image with great clarity to the visual.
really interesting video and I like your point about how the misuse of narration can ruin a great movie.
it reminded me of "Brief Encounters" by Noel Coward. That movie has some really beautiful moments -- and often the narration works. But the problem is the narration just doesn't know when to shut up.
Yup. You ruined it. So instead of the viewer feeling like they're the one looking out the rear window during the pan around, the narrator becomes the one and we're just along for the ride. The narration just really yanks you out of it and and makes it feel like you are just watching a movie.
Your Stewart impression is really good! But, you showed this mistake well. You didn't go off to irrelevant tangents either, you stayed true to what the character were to say if they wanted to ruin the scene.
Kinda reminded me of Our Town (I never really liked Our Town). I think it perfectly illustrates why it's usually best to keep quiet (especially if you have something visually stimulating). I love demonstrations like this. Have you done other things like this?
Great! That is exactly how the studio ruined the original cut of Blade Runner. I was fortunate to see the director's cut in the Castro Theater in San Francisco. What a difference!
Rear Window is a marvel of economy and precision. I once analyzed and made notes on the whole thing, shot-by-shot. There is not a split second of waste.
LOL. Rear Window just dropped from a perfect 10 to a 6. Thanks for letting me know who the neighbors that slept out on the balcony were. I wondered about them in the film itself, why they slept outside instead of inside.
Of course actual film had no narration at all and it drew audience in. That was actually one of the hallmark's of the film and a large part of what made it great: Long, extended shots letting the audience decide for themselves what was actually happening and what mattered and what didn't.
The only two things interesting about this movie was the set, I heard they literally built real apartment buildings, and the other thing was Grace Kellys ludicrous acccent. What the hell was an Irish American girl born in Phili doing talking with a European accent? No wonder she destroyed her career by marrying that French douchebag. She lived in fantasyland to begin with thinking she was some English Countess or something. And in the end she died fat, drunk.and miserable.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I don`t know why this film is so praised. I saw it last night for the first time and to me it seemed like the writer got a good idea for a story and just got lazy and crapped out. I mean seriously, think about it. The whole premise is a guy who believes a murder has taken place, and nobody believes him. OK, great, but then what? NOTHING HAPPENS! We go through all this boring crap until the end which shows us NOTHING but the complete obvious! It was just so retarded!
Great example....Some movies drive me insane with narration when it'd be so much more simple..and ultimately better to show it through film...My film studies teacher is right...Show don't tell...and you did a great job here.
Hahaha very entertaining ...... I've just watched this film over Christmas actually .... great impression of Jimmy Stewart ..... did you also break your leg for realism .... LOL !!!
if you mean that Ridley Scott's original cut didn't have any voiceover narration but he was told to put it in so people could understand it better, then yes. the narration was taken out in the director's cut release, and most people like it better without.
Ridley Scott had nothing to do with the narration to Blade Runner. They added it despite his strenuous objections. He said they did not understand the movie. How true. By having Ford narrate it, they caused the audience to identify with his character. But we mortal viewers are analogous to the skin jobs - which Decker eventually begins to see only at the end.
If I'm not mistaken, it isn't pan and scan... Movies at the time were shot at a 4:3 aspect ratio. It wasn't later that directors adopted a wider aspect ratio (via Cinemascope). I also know that Hitchcock was a big hold out when it came to adopting the anamorphic Widescreen format. What you are watching really is the movie the way Hitch shot... not counting my narration of course.
Good point about aspect ratios. "Rear Window" was actually shot in 1.66:1 ratio, which had temporarily become the Academy aspect ratio for a few years until 1.85:1 was adopted. Hitchcock never made the move to CinemaScope, but did opt to film a few movies in VistaVision during the mid-to-late 1950's.
What strikes me most about this is how perfectly Hitchcock conveys all this stuff from the original story without a single word - narration, dialogue, or anything else. He sets up the entire movie with visuals exclusively. Interesting demonstration, thanks for posting it.
strictly speaking, could have been a lot worse. I agree that the scene is perfect and powerful with just the street sounds to guide us through the neighborhood, but the narration works wonderfully as a story without the picture.
Awesome awesome awesome Jimmy Stewart impression, by the way, man.
You're absolutely right. It ruined the scene, mainly I think because you can't hear the brilliant score written by Franz Waxman that totally defines the film for me. Very unique project and a great Jimmy Stewart impression as well!
Indeed! Your James Stewart impression is brilliant!! I also agree that you make a very good point about the essence of visual and not so much narrative :)
This is a great way to show the difference in including dialogue and letting the story tell itself. Hitchcock was brilliant in this area of letting the pictures do the work. You can see such a big difference when you add the dialogue.
LOL
PtAltmVansanTarr 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The right winda!
RevanGabriel 9 months ago
Comment removed
RevanGabriel 9 months ago
I am showing this clip to my film class. Thank you for the example of how narration can really mess up this beautifully shot opening sequence. :) Thank you.
AndyTheRobot 11 months ago
I thought your impression was good! much better than what most people can do lol
pixelated111 1 year ago
not a bad jimmy stewart impression.
4gearkier 1 year ago
Absolutely love the Stewart impression! Very good! Ignore the haters lol
chrismonk1981 1 year ago
I think your Jimmy Stewart impression is excellent. "Rear wind-aaa"
ultrabrilliant 1 year ago
Me too.
JohnnyA1953 1 year ago
You know even though the narration ruins the scene, for me at least, I came to kind of enjoy it towards the end, but then it ended.
UBiQproductions 1 year ago
A fascinating little gem here. More than just illustrating how narration can ruin a scene, I think you've managed to highlight something that huge numbers of filmgoers (and far too many film MAKERS) fail to understand - the essential DIFFERENCE between the media. If you close your eyes and listen to the words, you can understand how Woolrich "painted" the scene, because that's the way you SHOW something on the printed page. Hitchcock translated that image with great clarity to the visual.
CptDunsel 1 year ago
really interesting video and I like your point about how the misuse of narration can ruin a great movie.
it reminded me of "Brief Encounters" by Noel Coward. That movie has some really beautiful moments -- and often the narration works. But the problem is the narration just doesn't know when to shut up.
tayrs88 1 year ago
that's a very good Jimmy Stewart impression.
SUPERMEDIABROTHERS6 1 year ago
Great voice! sounds just like Jimmy
Cherilynn100 1 year ago
Not a bad JS impersonation. I see what you mean about narration marring a movie.
3investigators 1 year ago
Yup. You ruined it. So instead of the viewer feeling like they're the one looking out the rear window during the pan around, the narrator becomes the one and we're just along for the ride. The narration just really yanks you out of it and and makes it feel like you are just watching a movie.
LonelyMountain1 1 year ago
The voice over sounds like Nixon.
allayne13 1 year ago
I really liked this. Good little script for the example. And your impression's pretty good I thought!
laurabob9119 1 year ago
You did a really nice job with the narration, and Rear Window is one of my favorite Hitchcock movies.
cha5 1 year ago 2
you are really good
ffscantfindausername 1 year ago
I actually did enjoy the narration, but I do still think that showing is better than telling, which I suppose was the point.
KayPictures 1 year ago
U did ruin it, but Is till enjoyed it. Your Hallmark of Jimmy is so good. I don't want to like this, but I do haha.
turnonright 1 year ago
Your Stewart impression is really good! But, you showed this mistake well. You didn't go off to irrelevant tangents either, you stayed true to what the character were to say if they wanted to ruin the scene.
nicoleeism 1 year ago
I thought the couple slept outside because their air con didn't work not because they liked the smell of the fresh air? Sorry just being picky lol
xRachie89x 2 years ago
Kinda reminded me of Our Town (I never really liked Our Town). I think it perfectly illustrates why it's usually best to keep quiet (especially if you have something visually stimulating). I love demonstrations like this. Have you done other things like this?
entrynotfound2 2 years ago
I actually liked it.
bubba11793 2 years ago
best hitchcock movie
badturkali 2 years ago
you didn't actually "ruined" the movie, it just got really weird. nice video, however
viniciusdgc 2 years ago
I, for one, think your impression hit the nail on the head. How in the world did
you get that good?
JupiterIV 2 years ago
I for one enjoyed your narration.......the taking of one element and adding another........very nicely done
lmgnandt 2 years ago
hahahahaha
Stopfollowingme646 2 years ago
Great! That is exactly how the studio ruined the original cut of Blade Runner. I was fortunate to see the director's cut in the Castro Theater in San Francisco. What a difference!
Rear Window is a marvel of economy and precision. I once analyzed and made notes on the whole thing, shot-by-shot. There is not a split second of waste.
JiveDadson 2 years ago
When you look at the thumbnail for this video in your channel main page, it says, "How I Ruined Hitchcock's Rear".
rackfocus 2 years ago 9
LOL. Rear Window just dropped from a perfect 10 to a 6. Thanks for letting me know who the neighbors that slept out on the balcony were. I wondered about them in the film itself, why they slept outside instead of inside.
Also, cool voice.
GoldKnightSkye 2 years ago
Great job on the voice!
mollylolly88 2 years ago 2
Nice execution of your idea, though I have to say, your voice reminded me more of Verger in Ridley Scott's "Hannibal" than of Jimmy Stewart.
StevenGrayPhotos 2 years ago 2
You know, you have a very interesting voice. I'd like to hear some more.
TheSupermodel123 2 years ago
Decent James Stewart
meb1982 2 years ago
Of course actual film had no narration at all and it drew audience in. That was actually one of the hallmark's of the film and a large part of what made it great: Long, extended shots letting the audience decide for themselves what was actually happening and what mattered and what didn't.
alexalex3131 2 years ago
i had to listen to that wice, it was that awesome. ;)
I4gotmyMANTRA 2 years ago
perfect voice!
xcutthroatromancex 2 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
The only two things interesting about this movie was the set, I heard they literally built real apartment buildings, and the other thing was Grace Kellys ludicrous acccent. What the hell was an Irish American girl born in Phili doing talking with a European accent? No wonder she destroyed her career by marrying that French douchebag. She lived in fantasyland to begin with thinking she was some English Countess or something. And in the end she died fat, drunk.and miserable.
Edhallick 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I don`t know why this film is so praised. I saw it last night for the first time and to me it seemed like the writer got a good idea for a story and just got lazy and crapped out. I mean seriously, think about it. The whole premise is a guy who believes a murder has taken place, and nobody believes him. OK, great, but then what? NOTHING HAPPENS! We go through all this boring crap until the end which shows us NOTHING but the complete obvious! It was just so retarded!
Edhallick 2 years ago
Great example....Some movies drive me insane with narration when it'd be so much more simple..and ultimately better to show it through film...My film studies teacher is right...Show don't tell...and you did a great job here.
thatveggiegirl 3 years ago
Hahaha very entertaining ...... I've just watched this film over Christmas actually .... great impression of Jimmy Stewart ..... did you also break your leg for realism .... LOL !!!
mariaud999 3 years ago
Damn, after I think about it, the narration definitely would have hurt the film, badly.
Very nice example.
Xendinthian 3 years ago
It sounds more like clint eastwood
firstlyric 3 years ago
nice impression, I think blade runner is an obvious example of bad narration.
coaxis314 3 years ago 2
In Blade Runner the voice off was put after the director's cut to please the audience
ubiqua 2 years ago
if you mean that Ridley Scott's original cut didn't have any voiceover narration but he was told to put it in so people could understand it better, then yes. the narration was taken out in the director's cut release, and most people like it better without.
MyName42 2 years ago
Ridley Scott had nothing to do with the narration to Blade Runner. They added it despite his strenuous objections. He said they did not understand the movie. How true. By having Ford narrate it, they caused the audience to identify with his character. But we mortal viewers are analogous to the skin jobs - which Decker eventually begins to see only at the end.
JiveDadson 2 years ago
Hehe, great impression of Jimmy Stewart, although it sounds as if it is an older version of him.
crazypigbreaks 3 years ago
You already ruin it in the first frame. Its Pan & Scan
Tacom4ster 3 years ago
If I'm not mistaken, it isn't pan and scan... Movies at the time were shot at a 4:3 aspect ratio. It wasn't later that directors adopted a wider aspect ratio (via Cinemascope). I also know that Hitchcock was a big hold out when it came to adopting the anamorphic Widescreen format. What you are watching really is the movie the way Hitch shot... not counting my narration of course.
whoiseyevan 3 years ago
@whoiseyevan
Good point about aspect ratios. "Rear Window" was actually shot in 1.66:1 ratio, which had temporarily become the Academy aspect ratio for a few years until 1.85:1 was adopted. Hitchcock never made the move to CinemaScope, but did opt to film a few movies in VistaVision during the mid-to-late 1950's.
wadeharris65 10 months ago
well he started in silents...so goes without saying.. pun intended.
alexitin 3 years ago 2
Best impression of Bob Newhart I have ever heard!
;)
MentalDavid 3 years ago
more like James Stewart....but yea.....
TheEverydayMoviegoer 3 years ago
I was kidding, of course. I know it's SUPPOSED to be Stewart... Hence the wink emoticon.
MentalDavid 3 years ago
lol, ok, gotcha!
;)
TheEverydayMoviegoer 3 years ago
What strikes me most about this is how perfectly Hitchcock conveys all this stuff from the original story without a single word - narration, dialogue, or anything else. He sets up the entire movie with visuals exclusively. Interesting demonstration, thanks for posting it.
mistabook 3 years ago 2
strictly speaking, could have been a lot worse. I agree that the scene is perfect and powerful with just the street sounds to guide us through the neighborhood, but the narration works wonderfully as a story without the picture.
Awesome awesome awesome Jimmy Stewart impression, by the way, man.
brought2ubyliz 3 years ago 2
Haha, good job in achieving your goal - making the scene suck.
and as everyone says...great Stewart impression.
TheAdventureBoys 3 years ago
Wow, it does ruin it. This is me watching this: zzzzz. And its not only cuz its 4 am while I'm writing an essay about this film. XD
LizetM 3 years ago
You're absolutely right. It ruined the scene, mainly I think because you can't hear the brilliant score written by Franz Waxman that totally defines the film for me. Very unique project and a great Jimmy Stewart impression as well!
MakeViolntRevolution 3 years ago 2
Wow. That really, uh, sucked.
ckdh67 3 years ago
Great project. You do a wicked Jimmy Stewart impression.
elizabethrosalyn 3 years ago 3
hahaha
"There uhhh, faces were too, uhhh, small.
Jonnyliebs 3 years ago 2
Good God, I really thought this was Jimmy Stewart at first. You should portray him in a film or play, that's a great impression!
SugarKowalczyk88 3 years ago
Ha great impression =D 5*****'s!
jwferreira7 3 years ago 2
Old Arabic proverb: "One destroyer is equal
to a thousand builders." Congrads - you
qualify - you're equal. (Jokin')
sanamau 3 years ago
hahaha now all I need to hear you say is "AW shucks" and i'll think you're the real jimmy stewart
jsXanatos 4 years ago 2
Holy MY MY, that's some wicked mimic of Jimmy Stewart's accent. What a lovely sound! lol. Keep it up.
wuyiting 4 years ago
Fantastic Jimmy Stewart impression. Material could have been better, but still pretty good.
foxfire9 4 years ago
Indeed! Your James Stewart impression is brilliant!! I also agree that you make a very good point about the essence of visual and not so much narrative :)
dormi87 4 years ago
This is a great way to show the difference in including dialogue and letting the story tell itself. Hitchcock was brilliant in this area of letting the pictures do the work. You can see such a big difference when you add the dialogue.
I like your Stewart impression also. Great job!
Sallie79 4 years ago 2