Alfred Hitchcock Presents, "Bang! You're Dead"

Season 7, Episode 2: Original Air Date: 17 October 1961

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• Alfred Hitchcock Presents
• Bang! You're Dead

[ultimatezeldafan101]

awesome!

if you love hitchcock like this

[Juliaflo]

@RatnipTX After 50 years, Mr. Hitchcock's cautionary at the end still gives me goosebumps. If it does the same to you, raise your hand.

Happy Hallowe'en.

[coolbreeze161]

this is a lesson for all gun owners not to leave a weapon where kids can find it.

[Richard40171]

@lukafafrenz Cause I'm methodical in my replies & I feel frustrated by the ltd space here, otherwise it wd be a great channel for aesthetic POVs. I'm a firm believer one can't PROVE value but can ARGUE it & that's educational. I can't prove I'm right, you're wrong but I can present arguments as in forensic debates. Who can prove Elvis was a genius, or Mozart? What I don't like is the cornfield mentality I stimes find where everyone says, "It's good" or they're sent to the cornfields

[lukafafrenz]

@Richard40171 wow --why use 3 comment spaces to reply to my succinct response to your initial points? the space isn't even used to elucidate on any previous topic (save for your mention of the word "physical" --which i used in quotes to refer to your choice of words from your original comment)

the limitations of this medium don't allow dialogue as we could have (talking film over a pint in a pub) verbally

but cheers anyway & repeated praise to "hitch" for making suspense visual & visceral

[Richard40171]

@lukafafrenz >degree, I mean aesthetics is subjective but not criticism, which is objective in the sense that one argues one's point by appealing to images, context, mise-en-scene, etc. It's subjective whether that convinces or not, but the argument is objective. One thing that annoys me about statements about acting is they're never objective in my sense. A critic categorically declares a performance great or lacking & we're supposed to take his word for it! Bad criticism!

[Richard40171]

@lukafafrenz >a plot like anything else! Removing a meal off a chest advanced the plot and created intense suspense in ROPE. You're entitled to your opinion about the bullets; but from the first shot I KNEW there was no way that boy would kill anyone or even fire a bullet. Oddly one critic felt that about FOUR O'CLOCK, but I did not. So it's subjective to a degree. FOUR O'CLOCK is brilliantly suspenseful to me, as is ROPE (poss. HItch's masterpiece, not VERTIGO). When I say "to a >

[Richard40171]

@lukafafrenz Your reply hinges on the word "physical." The great scene in GODFATHER when Pacino and help try to protect his wounded father by sitting outside the hospital is "physical." The wonderful thing about suspense is it's "internal," whereas surprise is "external." No matter how many times I c Rope or Godfather I feel intense suspense, because it's internal; and, yes, physical BY DEFINITION (any image is physical; Bergman showed this). Of course "licking stamps" can advance>

[lukafafrenz]

@Richard40171 i disagree w/ each of your points --it'd be a missed opportunity not to make suspense"physical" --the power that film has over written works is the ability to communicate viscerally thru images(i felt every bullet loaded) --there are endless alternatives for the characters' actions, but to what end? licking stamps can be"milked" for suspense, but wouldn't advance the plot --& belying suspension of disbelief is like fretting about seeing the beginning before the end(its fundamental)

[narziss39]

The witchdoctor mask looks like a prop that was used in a Three Stooges short, "Hot Scots," with some hair glued on top.

[shannonm75]

@Juliaflo Oh I know what Lost In Space is. I saw reruns when i was a kid. It was on all the time. Bill Mumy was good in that. And "Danger Will Robinson!"

[Juliaflo]

@shannonm75 As surely you did not know that the young lady playing the cheese salesgirl would team up with young Master Mumy a few years later in a little opus called 'Lost in Space'.