To Catch a Thief (1955)
Another movie review by Grovemiller and Kirkbride

Dustin: For this month's edition of good ol' "Filling the Void" I decided to take us back toward the Golden Age of Hollywood and picked a Hitchcock film that I'd never seen -- To Catch a Thief. Needless to say, it's a bit of departure from our normal subjects.

DJ: Oh, you'd never seen it?

Dustin: Nope, I'd seen most of his other big works, but this one had eluded me until now.

DJ: I thought I'd seen it, but soon realized I'd gotten it confused with Notorious. (the movie Mission Impossible 2 paid homage to/totally ripped off of...)

Dustin: I feel it safe to say that it's really not really your typical Hitchcock... at least not what the "stereotype" is at any rate.

DJ: No, this is fairly light and bubbly. When watching this, I was found it interesting that most people seem to think Psycho when they think of the ol' Hitchcock, but I think that flick was maybe an oddity. His other stuff is usually, especially in this fairly light jaunt, a little more "fun".

Dustin: Well, I don't know if I'd call Vertigo or Rear Window fun, but yes... neither of those is Psycho. Or The Birds.

DJ: Nah, you're right. I'm a boob. What I mean is, his other stuff isn't as gruesome.

Dustin: He really covered quite the spectrum of genre, didn't he?

DJ: I think I would've loved to see a full-on Hitchcock comedy.

Dustin: Oh, that's a wild idea... I think he certainly had an extremely tongue-in-cheek approach to a lot of little moments in his films, particularly in this one. I think that that really could have blossomed well into a full-fledged comedy. But then again, maybe it would be overkill -- Thief alone has a couple of moments where it's maybe trying to be "too" funny.

DJ: I think a lot of it has to do with the style of the times. Some stuff seems corny fifty years later.

Dustin: Why don't you give us the best plot symposis that you can muster?

DJ: I was thinking the same thing...

Dustin: And while you're cooking that up, let me take a moment to say that this plot synopsis is brought to you by the Flying Dog Brewing Company of Denver, Colorado. Makers of fine, fine beers.

DJ: Beer is good.

Dustin: Flying Dog "Road Dog" Scottish Porter.... "Good Beer, No Shit."

DJ: Anyway, in To Catch A Thief, the always dashing Cary Grant (I may have a man-crush on him) plays John Robie, a former cat burglar living in the French Riviera. When a series of crimes -- very closely resembling the robberies he committed fifteen years earlier as "the Cat" -- start again, he's forced to catch this copycat to clear his name. On this lil' adventure, he meets into Frances, a beautiful socialite played by Grace Kelly, whose mother owns some fine diamonds that are on this new Cat's hit list.

Dustin: Well, you can take your man-crush on Cary Grant, because I'm ALL about
Grace Kelly. To be perfectly frank, I can't ever really recall seeing pictures of her before. And when she appeared on screen for the first time, I just about drooled on myself. Absolutely stunning!

DJ: They're a couple of classically good-looking people, and they play their parts perfectly. I love the vocal stylings and back and forth dialogue of this era of filmmaking.

Dustin: Yes, and both actors really seemed to have a good feel for their roles. Although I'd say that Grant would occasionally drift into this thing where he seemed overly eager -- not exactly the kind of behavior I'd expect to see in a mellow cat burglar.

DJ: Again, it might be due to the era more than anything else. Along those same lines, I found myself, much to my embarrassment, getting a little bored at times. The quick cutting of today's movies has ruined me. For instance, when the authorities first come to question Robie (Grant), his daring escape and ensuing car chase almost seemed to be in slow motion, especially in that one long aerial shot.

Dustin:  Agreed... I think that I also want to spend a little more time looking back at the "classic" films of the Golden Age, simply because they're so radically different in style. Really, I'd say for the better.

DJ: I feel like I'm a snot-nosed punk kid sometimes. I have to remind myself that I'm watching masters at work. There's an economy of shots and even dialogue that I think is missing from many movies today. Not that any fidgety MTV kids could sit through something this.

Dustin: One random note about this flick -- all the stuff that was filmed in France (all the exteriors plus a few set shots) were filmed in Paramount's brand new VISTA VISION which was a new model of camera designed to really bring out color and clarity in the picture.

DJ: And make Cary Grant look completely orange.

Dustin: Well, yeah. But aside from that, it's one thing that this film does do spectacularly... the cinematography are great for the day. There are even a lot of helicopter shots.

DJ: Yeah, this is a nice looking, well-shot movie. But of course it is! What did you think of the fairly thin, though amusing plot?

Dustin: I'm actually amazed that Hitch got as much out of the novel by David Dodge as he did... there were a couple of moments where I was getting that "come on, let's wrap this up because you're running out of story" feeling. But again, it's a credit to the actors for carrying it through. We also have yet to mention a great appearance by British "Oh it's that guy" of the day John Williams as H.H. Hughson, the insurance adjuster who partners with Grant's Robie in an attempt to catch the real culprit.

DJ: Yeah, his role was a great little addition as well as plot device, giving Robie a list of clients so he knows who to watch when trying to catch the new Cat. But, honestly, there's not a lot of meat to this movie. It's just a slightly effervescent diversion. The twist was pretty obvious, and little of it was that exciting (at least by today's insanely hyped-up standards), but it was charming and fun. I'd actually love to have seen it when it was first released. I always think that about old movies. I wonder how much my opinion of them is based on what I've seen that's been influenced by them.

Dustin: But still, I'd say there was still a tangible "who dunnit" undercurrent to the piece, Hitchcock made sure that the feeling was there. Not a serious mystery, but enough to keep you engaged.

DJ: Yeah. Come to think of it, I wasn't sure at first whodunnit, and was dead wrong at one point. Maybe it was more like I was pretty sure, then not sure, then, after it was revealed, "Of course! I was right all along! … Except for when I second guessed myself."

Dustin: Yeah, I figured it out correctly just before the reveal.

DJ: But I think the character interplay and beautiful locations are the main draws to this movie. The story mechanics are as good as they need to be, nothing more.

Dustin: Without being a spoiler for anyone who wants to see the picture, there's a clear moment where it's suddenly very obvious that one of your suspects isn't the thief.

DJ: Yeah, I know what you're talking about. You know, this is a solid movie. Not Hitchcock's best, but better than most films. I think that my main problems (which is perhaps too strong a word), just have to do with being of a different era.

Dustin: Well, this film fell pretty much right in the middle of four really bigger pieces of Hitchcock's: Dial M for Murder, was 1954, <I>Rear Window</I> was also '54, Thief was '55 along with his TV series, and then after a few more smaller projects you've got Vertigo in 1958 and then North by Northwest in '59. It could be he was just going through a lighter phase, spending creative energy in other places between those massive pictures.

DJ: Possibly. Just keeping working, and, probably, having a lot of fun. This is a light, light movie overall. I bet they all had a good time making it. But, okay, the biggest unintentional laugh, to me, was the love scene..

Dustin: Oh, the fireworks.

DJ: The fireworks going off in-between kisses. It's the type of thing that's been parodied so much now! I don't know if it was funny, then...

Dustin: Yeah, and at the time they did it to avoid studio censor objections.

DJ: Ah, really? That's clever. Man, while talking about this, I alternately feel like a punk ass kid and an old curmudgeon.

Dustin: If I recall correctly, the censor didn't want them to show Grant on top of Kelly, kissing.

DJ: Oh, okay! How times have changed (I'm an old man, blah, blah, blah)...

Dustin: So the editor got clever and interspersed these gratuitous fireworks shots from the action in the background.

DJ: Wasn't there something like that in Notorious?

Dustin: Not seen it.

DJ: There was a long, long kissing scene between Grant and Ingrid Bergman. They subtly broke it up with dialogue, but stayed close the whole time. Check it out. So, are you glad you finally took a look at To Catch A Thief?

Dustin: Yes, absolutely! It's not something I'm going to feel compelled to watch again any time soon, but it's still a great little film. Perfect for a cozy night in with a loved one. Or with a six-pack of beer from the Flying dog Brewing Company!

DJ: One loved one or six! It's all good...