Ufr angellier close-up on alfred hitchcock

PART II: THE SPECTATOR TRICKED BY HITCHCOCK

Thanks to the different POVs used, Hitchcock allows the spectators to be part of the action. Moreover, we sometimes know more than the characters and it heightens the sense of suspense and of dramatic irony. For instance, we know before the other characters that Marion has been murdered. Yet, we sometimes think that we know what is to follow but we are tricked by the director. The latter said to Truffaut: « La construction de ce film est très intéressante et c’est mon expérience la plus passionnante de jeu avec le public. Avec Psycho, je faisais de la direction de spectateurs, exactement comme si je jouais de l’orgue. » He even goes on adding : “On tourne et on retourne le public, on le maintient aussi loin que possible de ce qui va se dérouler. » ¹²

1.Mrs Bates

The most striking element of the film is the character of Mrs Bates. Indeed, during the major part of the film, the spectators are convinced that she is alive and that she is Marion’s and Arbogast’s murderer. We have doubts when the sheriff tells Lila and Sam that she died several years before. This increases the suspense since we are anxious to know what has really happened, and we also want to discover the identity of the person who talks to Norman and who sits behind the window of the mansion.

The importance of off-screen sounds

When Marion is alone in her room, she can hear Mrs Bates arguing with Norman. Then, we have a shot of “the house that speaks”. Indeed, the conversation can be interpreted as a sort of off-screen sound within the screen. A similar technique was used in Rear Window since the walls between the windows create areas of off-screen space within the space of the screen.

After Marion’s death, the spectators are “left alone” in her bedroom until they hear Norman’s voice (it is an off-screen voice) screaming: “Mother, O God, Mother, blood, blood”. At that moment, a static low-angle shot shows the Bates house that looks more mysterious than ever [49:30]. Critics have argued that the two lights that we can see coming from the house may be interpreted as Mrs Bates’ presence. Amanda Wells asserts that: “Seen through the hotel room window after the shower murder, the house is dark except for the two bright lights that resemble eyes, perhaps signifying Mother’s watchful presence¹³.” Even if this comparison may be debatable, the spectators are convinced of Mrs Bates’ presence thanks to Norman’s words.

Other cinematic devices to delude the spectators

The spectator can be misled by the POV of a protagonist. Here are two examples. A subjective low-angle shot — Arbogast's POV — shows someone standing at the window [1:10:02]. Yet, Norman claims that there is nobody home. His answer is very spontaneous and it reveals that he is telling the truth. There is nobody at home since he killed his mother several years before. He says: “I’m not capable of being fooled, not even by a woman.” Then, Sam also sees an old woman behind a window, which increases Lila’s curiosity as well as ours.

Another device is used. Mrs Bates is seen three times in the film if we exclude the several shots where we see the shadow of a human being behind the window of a bedroom. Indeed, we obviously see her at the very end of Psycho when we discover the truth about her and when we see her skeleton. Yet, we also see her when Arbogast is killed. Hitchcock used overhead shots in order to show her without showing her face. The same kind of technique is used when we see Mrs Bates for the second time. Norman is holding her in his arms and they are arguing (see Fig. 8). As a result, the audience is focused on their conversation and they do not pay attention to the fact that they cannot see Mrs Bates’ face. Hitchcock obviously seemed to take pleasure in tricking the spectators:

[…] si je l’avais montrée de dos, j’aurais eu l’air de masquer volontairement son visage et le public se serait méfié. […] Le public porte tellement d’attention au dialogue qu’il ne pense pas à ce que fait la caméra, grâce à quoi nous sommes maintenant à la verticale et le public ne s’étonne pas de voir Perkins transportant sa mère, vu à la verticale par-dessus leurs têtes. C’était passionnant pour moi d’utiliser la caméra pour égarer le public. ¹⁴ 

So, here, Hitchcock deludes us thanks to the angle of his camera.

2.The Murder of the Star

Marion Crane, played by Janet Leigh, is the first character the spectators see and they quickly share her POV. Besides, Janet Leigh was a famous actress and spectators of Hollywood films were used to follow the star from the beginning until the end. As Hitchcock explains to Truffaut: « Je vous parie tout ce que vous voudrez que, dans une production ordinaire, on aurait donné à Janet Leigh l’autre rôle, celui de la sœur qui enquête, car il n’est pas d’usage de tuer la star au premier tiers du film. » ¹⁵ Therefore, Marion’s death is totally unexpected.

At first, we are convinced that the story is going to be about Marion’s theft, and also her relationship with Sam. It is emphasised by the presence of the policeman as well as by the conversation between Marion and Norman. Marion does not reveal her true identity to him; she does not confess what she has done but Norman’s comments make her change her mind. She decides to go back to Phoenix and to give the money back. After Marion’s death, a tracking shot shows the newspaper in which the money is hidden [49:19].

Fig. 15: The close-up in Marion’s bedroom Fig. 16: The money hidden in the newspaper

This is what Hitchcock called a McGuffin¹⁶. It is an element that starts the action and sometimes justifies it. A McGuffin is a plot device, a desired object that the protagonist deeply wants to obtain, protect or control. It can be anything: a place, a person or an object for instance. At the beginning of the film, the McGuffin plays an important role. However, its importance declines as the plot goes on.

In Psycho, the McGuffin is the money; we think that it is going to be a major element of the plot but, in the end, it has no real importance. The action is triggered by the close-up on the envelope full of money in the bedroom scene. Indeed, since Marion stole the money, the spectators have been led to think that the whole story would be about the theft. As a consequence, the audience is completely puzzled when they realise that the money was just a pretext. They did not even think that Marion Crane could die, which proves once again that they have been tricked by the director. The latter explains this to Truffaut:

Je crois quand même que le public a eu pitié de Janet Leigh au moment de sa mort. En fait, la première partie de l’histoire est exactement ce qu’on appelle ici à Hollywood un « hareng rouge », c’est-à-dire un truc destiné à détourner votre attention, afin d’intensifier le meurtre, afin qu’il constitue pour vous une surprise totale.¹⁷

In his study of Hitchcock’s film entitled The Unconscious, Anthony Easthope suggests that the film is made up of two narratives and not one. Indeed, since Marion Crane dies early in the plot, there has to be something else to follow:

To begin with, there are two main narratives, not one. Marion’s story has no necessary connection with her death; it is pure chance that she stayed at the Bates Motel. Her death initiates a second narrative; and a main character who is not one but two people. But we don’t find this out until near the end.¹⁸