TORN CURTAIN

US, 1966, 128 minutes, Colour.
Paul Newman, Julie Andrews, Lila Kedrova, Tamara Toumanova.
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock.

Torn Curtain was Hitchcock's fiftieth film. Everyone was looking forward to something special and people were, by and large, disappointed with Torn Curtain. This put something of an unfair pressure on the reception of the film which, years later, seems much better than was first thought. In it Hitchcock returns to his espionage interest ( The '39 Steps, Foreign Correspondent and Topaz) while keeping strong elements of his belief in suspense. The killing of Gromek in this film is a classic case of such suspense, after macabre humour, with the problem of audience identification with killing. (This sequence was practically eliminated in the early television presentation of the film.)

Paul Newman, in his only Hitchcock film, follows something of the Cary Grant style. Opinion is divided about the merits of Julie Andrews' performance. The film looks obvious at times and its plot is not very original, but it certainly gives a good idea of Hitchcock's style.

1. Was this a successful and enjoyable Hitchcock film? What did the title mean? What was the impact of the credit sequences - the continuing faces, the use of faces in the fire (an inferno?) and the ominous music? What atmosphere did this create?

2. How successfully did the film create a world of order then plunge into a world of chaos? Was this evident in the structure of the film?

3. Was Armstrong a sympathetic character? Comment on Paul Newman's portrayal.

4. Was Sarah an attractive heroine? What did you think of Julie Andrews performance?

5. How credible is such a spy story? The arranging of all this by American Intelligence? The reality of the flight to Berlin and the defection?

6. The impact of Gromeck's death is considered a high point in Hitchcock's films. Why? Was it unnecessarily brutal? Did the audience participate in this murder because of Michael?

7. What was audience reaction to Sarah's choice to become a traitor?

8. Why are escapes always interesting for audiences? Was this a credible escape? What were the main ingredients for its success?

9. Was the happy ending justified?

10. What comment did the film make about the realities of spying? Or was it merely concerned with being entertainment?

11. How does Hitchcock reinforce audience attitudes towards morality by playing with their feelings, their identification, with hero and heroine in dubious behaviour?

12. How does Hitchcock utilise these moral questions for suspense purposes?

13. The importance of character: Armstrong's status as a scientist credible? Were his goals in being a spy, and a scientist credible? His relationship with Sarah? How genuine was this? How necessary was the deceit? Did it raise any problems in Michael's conscience? Why was Sarah so blind to realities about Michael? (Was the film meant to see Michael for the first part from Sarah's point of view? If so, how effectively done was this?) What was her reaction to finding that Michael was not as she imagined? What challenge did this make to her emotions and her conscience? Her plane ride to East Germany, the impact of the arrival there, the interviews, her having to make some kind of decision to be with him? The audience response to questions of patriotism and conscience? The audience reaction to Michael and to Sarah? Should patriotism predominate over emotional loyalties or not?

14. Comment on the intricacy of the Pi system. How interesting was the presentation of this spying network? How did this add to the suspense? The people who belong to the system in their various professions? The tactics they used to make contact? How central to the film was Michael's interrogation of Professor Lint? Given the fact that he had so little time, how credible was his getting the secret from the Professor? On what weaknesses of the Professor did he play? How successfully? Comment on his conference to the scientists, the irony on the fact that the murder had been discovered. Professor Lint's vanity and curiosity? Professor Lint and Sarah and the softening of the job? The use of the blackboard for the battle of wits between Michael and the Professor? What was the impact of the Professor's realisation of what had happened?

15. From this point how did the film grow in suspense? The need for escape? The physical distance to be covered, the people he contacted, the danger? How well did Hitchcock use suspense tactics?

16. The episode with the bus. Why was this interesting? The people who were in it and the reason why they were there? The woman who objected to the risk? The assistance of all the others? Being chased by the real bus? The hold-ups by the police? The final impact of the dispersing of the passengers and their being shot at?

17. What was the point of the point of the encounter between Michael and the Countess? How ironic was this contact? The fact that she recognised who Michael was? Audience reaction in thinking she was a spy? The pathetic nature of her desperate attempt to get to America? What kind of world did she live in? Were you sympathetic for her? How saddening was the fact that she was left behind?

18. The effectiveness of the ballet sequence, and the way it was filmed - especially the glaring looks of the ballerina? How was this prepared for by the ballerina's earlier appearance on the plane? How dramatic was this sequence? The fact that the hero and heroine are trapped in seats in a crowded theatre and find it difficult to escape?

19. What was your emotional reaction to the call of fire, and the plausibility of escape? How enjoyable was this and what a relief to be free of the claustrophobic effect of the theatre?

20. Did the final play on the cargo on the ship add to the film? Did you think that they were really being shot at?