The Men Who Knew Two Much A Compairson of Hitchocks Classic Original an

The Men Who Knew Two Much A Compairson of Hitchocks Classic Original and Remake Many works of art can be considered artifacts that hold volumes of information regarding the culture of the people that created them and the historical context in which they lived. Films are also treasures of culture, filled with clues and insights into the attitudes and perceptions of the people of the day. While documentary films obviously present a historical record of people and events, dramatic fictional movies can also reveal the same. Comparing the main characters in Hitchcock's 1934 The Man Who knew Too Much with their 1955 counterparts unveils many differences between American and English cultures, expectations of their women and the pre- and post-war world view. THE HEROES [top] The heroes, heroines and villains portrayed in the two versions of the film were drawn quite differently. Lawrence (1934) was assertive and took control of the situation, while McKenna (1955) seemed to let the situation control him. When Lawrence got the message from his wife about the cryptic note, he immediately ran into Louis' room to get it. He used his resources and wit to get him through sticky situations, from standing up to the authority of Scotland Yard, to tangling with the dentist to the chair fight at the church. Lawrence even recruited Clive to do most of the dirty work such as getting a tooth pulled or being hypnotized by the 7-fold ray. Unlike Lawrence, McKenna was largely ineffectual and kind of bumbling at times. It wasn't until the very end that he actually took any risk when he went to the hitman's box at Albert Hall and then when he tripped up Mr. Dreighton on the stairs. McKenna's wife seemed the stronger and smarter one throughout as she was suspicious of Louis in Marrakech and later figured out Ambrose Chapel was a place instead of a person. THE VILLAINS [top] The portrayal of the villain was different in both versions as well. In the first one, the villain was singularly personified in the form of Abbot, but the second film's villain was shared by the Dreightons and the foreigner who wanted to become Ambassador. In contrast, the motive of Abbot was rather ambiguous and only referred to as "the cause," while the assassination of the Ambassador in the color version was clearly a means for personal advancement... ...and hugged. However, the role of women in 1995 America is a little bit 1934, a little bit 1955 and a lot of neither. The following generalizations are just that: Today in this society, women are expected to be sexy and smart,but not too much of either one. If a girl is very glamorous, she is not expected (or desired) by males to be smart, and women see her as hurting the liberation movement, perpetuating the "object" stereotype. On the other hand, a smart, assertive woman is often viewed as being unfeminine and bitchy, especially in the workplace. Hillary Clinton personifies this dichotomy - she was applauded for abandoning the subservient First Lady role and at the same time criticized for overstepping her bounds. Wonder Woman is perhaps the only cultural hero to solve this problem. She could be sexy and strong in her little Wonder Woman outfit and tiara, as well as loyal and subordinate in her glasses as Diana Prince. But she only succeeded by becoming two people. We still have a long way to go. Bibliography: Â ©1996 Chris Sheridan All views expressed are the opinions of the author. Feel free to link to this page. For educational and informational purposes only.