Why don't people like this?

Or maybe it just isn't as exciting, novel, or well-written as a lot of Hitch's other works. It doesn't have the shock power of something like Psycho or The Birds. It doesn't have the depth or artistry of Vertigo or Rebecca. And it doesn't have the pure thrills of Rope or North by Northwest. I think it just doesn't do any one thing all that well, and so it falls below the highlights of the Hitchcock canon. That's not to say it isn't an enjoyable movie, of course.

I think the story is really good. Angus MacPhail wrote a brilliant treatment for the film. But I felt that Script by John Michael Hayes lacked discipline. The script is good. But it doesn't explain some of the elements properly. Some scenes go too slow and some scenes jump too fast. This may be because Hitchcock had to start the shooting before the script was finished.

To me, the movie is good. But I like Original far better.

It should be noted that Hitchcock had to start shooting before the script was finished. So they had to finish the script much more faster. This may have been reason why the film is weak.

In Original The Man Who Knew too Much, we have the chair fight. In this film, we have the "Sequence at the taxidermist". I think one of purpose with this sequence is to create a horror where there is no horror. It shows that Dr. McKenna is a human being who makes mistakes just like any of us.

I can also answer you last point. Certainly, they act like Stupid. And we find that Draytons are much more mature in the scene in the hotel. But later, we see that Draytons are just wolves in sheeps' clothing. Although McKennas are annoying and stupid, still they do stick together most of difficult situations.

But I do agree there are problems in the script. Hitchcock himself knew that.

as is your brain.

"- Doris Day Shout-singing that lousy song over and over."

Amen, brother (sister?).

I can overlook some of the plot holes/inconsistencies, etc. I don't mind the cheesy amateurish rear projection he used in most of his films (which really sticks out like a sore thumb here, though).

And I really don't think the taxidermist shop scene is worth all the brickbats being thrown at it. Really. Take a deep breath...hold it...hold it...hold it...now let it out. It's really not that bad.

But if you want a really good reason to stick the knife in and twist it (and please, twist it HARD), it's that stupid, manipulative, clichéd, not-even-fit-for-an-Afterschool-Special ending -- "I know how I'll save my son....I'll SING!" GAG! Fewer things in this world will make you want to put your foot through your TV screen more than this nauseating "climax".

I hated that stupid, hideous song when I first heard it as the theme for Doris Day's TV show, then really hated it when I saw this film for the first time in the late 70s. And I don't buy the argument that "Her singing is *supposed* to be irritating/grating". Baloney.

And by the time that snotty tone-deaf little brat began shriek-singing it at the end (just when you thought it couldn't get any worse) I was praying that somehow Hitch would do us a favor and have the little twerp trip going down the stairs and maybe get impaled on a ceremonial sword, or just break his neck -- whatever shuts him up. But no such luck.

And before anyone helpfully reminds me that "this song won the Best Original Song Oscar that year…so there!" -- do I even have to mention how much of a total pathetic JOKE the "best" song Oscar is? Here's a helpful reminder:

total Oscars won by Phil Collins, Andrew Lloyd Weber and Elton John: 3
total Oscars won by George Gershwin, Ira Gershwin and Cole Porter: 0

I rest my case.

Yes, That song was irritating and the taxidermist was pretty much unneeded, but the medication scene was absolutely on target. Better living through chemistry was very much the order of the day in the 50s. Think Mother's Little Helper by the Stones. I was watching another movie the other day, it may have been With Six You Get Egg roll, but there's a line when one of the characters is tense, "do you want a tranquilizer?" (yes, I know that was in the 60s), so yes they did stuff like that in the oh-so-squeaky-clean 50s. And pleeeease stop trying to put today's PC attitudes on 60 year old films. "Shockingly insensitive"....what, are you a headline writer for AOL? Other than when Stewart had enough of not eating with his "dirty hand" did they act like "boorish Americans"? "Unmitigated failure" lol Pseudo intellectual horses patoot.

You realise Doris Day practically shouting the song is the ACTUAL POINT?

She was doing it for her son to hear, as he did and began whistling back to her.


Babies kill TV shows!

The thing that I find a little unsettling is Dr Ben's sudden patronising attitude towards Jo, insisting on medicating her after she had been far more alert than he, to the prevailing situation in Morocco. Father knowing best back in the 50's.

Away with the manners of withered virgins