MovieChat Forums > Blackmail (1929) Discussion > No blood after stabbing the Artist?

No blood after stabbing the Artist?


How did she manaage to stab the artist to death without a drop of blood on the knife or on her clothes? Didn't they show blood in that era? Made it seem rather phony.

reply

She wasn't wearing her clothes -- she was wearing her undergarments. But I wondered the same thing. Had to conclude there would have been blood but Hitchcock elected to not display it onscreen.





Okay folks, show's over, nothing to see here!

reply

the whole plot was a bit of a charade. Why can't a woman knife a man who is trying to rape her?

reply

mitchflorida, the girl's problem would be trying to prove the musician had tried to rape her. WE, THE VIEWERS, know that -- but if she were implicated, charged and brought to trial for murder, how would she be able to prove in court that it was a justifiable homicide? Therein lay her problem and why she saw no other recourse than to cover up her deed.

Okay folks, show's over, nothing to see here!

reply

I don't know,, thath's a good one,, maybe it would have been considered to gory for that time period..

are you going to bark all day little doggie,, or are you going to bite

reply

Probably the same reason why Rico in "Little Caesar" wasn't bleeding after being riddled with bullets - or anyone else in movies during much of early cinema. In "The Roaring Twenties", possibly the only sign of blood is near the beginning when Cagney is wrapping his bleeding hand. When all the people were shot in the movie - and there were a lot - you never saw any sign of blood. I don't know when the sight of blood first started being commonplace in movies.

There were some exceptions - when Lulu and her husband are fighting over the gun in "Pandora's Box", after the puff of smoke is seen, you do see what is supposed to be blood coming out of her husband's mouth.

reply

That's common with a lot of older mysteries.

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

reply