sexual predator

How does any of those claims, even if they are true, affect the quality of his work?

Are these claims even true. Hitchcocks been dead 36 years. We can't ask him these questions. It's one thing to say and alive person did it vs a dead person. They sure as hell cant defend themselves. I don't really care to be frank. He's a damn good director and always will be. His name won't be tarnished by these so called acusations.

Most film directors (and most likely most men with lots of money and power) are jerks/philanderers/womanizers/abusers/manipulators/freaks of one sort or another. Ingmar Bergman, Woody Allen, Polanski, the list goes on. There were a lot of directors and producers which were way worse than Hitchcock.

In the end talent and character are very different things.

The accusations against him are not proven. and anyway, if you got rid of every film in which the director or an actor had been accused of some unauthorised groping, you probably would not be left with many films.

The accusations against him are not proven. and anyway, if you got rid of every film in which the director or an actor had been accused of some unauthorised groping, you probably would not be left with many films.


That may be the case today but that was not the case in the early sixties when Birds and Marnie were created.





Everybody censors, including you.

What wasn't the case? i don't understand that.

What I meant to say is that in the early sixties it would have been very difficult, if not impossible, for Hedren to take legal action against Hitchcock, in contrast to today.




Everybody censors, including you.

well, i wasn't talking about legal action, which is what confused me about your post. i was talking about chucking out films that featured men who have been accused of sexual misconduct. there seem to be so many of them. You wouldn't be left with a lot of films if you did that.