MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > Alfred Hitchcock and Billy Wilder Lie Ab...

Alfred Hitchcock and Billy Wilder Lie About The Shower Scene


Formerly ecarle.

I"ve been doing some internet reading recently and a couple of articles ended up tying directors Hitchcock and Billy Wilder together and one of them raised a pretty interesting point: both men could be inveterate liars ....to suit their egos. Its the Hollywood way.

I'll open by noting that I always found Hitchcock and Billy Wilder to be pretty much a "matched pair" from 1959 through 1972. 1959/1960 found both men peaking (NXNW/Psycho for Hitch; Some Like It Hot/The Apartment for Wilder), then the 60's saw a couple of hits(The Birds and Irma La Douce, which was BIGGER than The Birds) and then a slow steady decline. 1964: Marnie and Kiss Me Stupid. 1966: Torn Curtain and The Fortune Cookie.

1972 had Frenzy for Hitchcock(an R-rated comeback hit) and Avanti for Wilder(an R-rated flop).

Hitchcock died in 1980. Wilder made his last movie in 1981.

Yep...a pretty matched pair.

Anyway, one thing I found on the net was the original 1960 "Sight and Sound" review of Psycho. But, interestingly, Psycho was PAIRED with The Apartment (they came out the same June week in NYC) and the critic saw Hitchcock and Wilder as very connected in their vision, and Psycho and The Apartment as very connected in THEIR vision. I couldn't agree more. For one thing, BOTH movies were in black and white in 1960, a year when color was more the norm. And they both "pushed envelopes" on sex(both movies) and violence(Psycho) and they were ferociously entertaining even as a depressing undertow drove both films.

What was interesting(again) is that all the way back IN 1960, that Sight and Sound critic saw the "Hitchcock/Wilder" connection.

---

Then I found somebody's study of how Hitchcock "sold out Saul Bass" in his interview with Truffaut.

Hitch and Truffaut reach Psycho and this exchange:

Truffaut: I understand that in addition to doing the titles for the picture, Saul Bass did some storyboards for the film.
Hitchcock: He was interested in working on the picture, so I asked him to do a storyboard for the second murder, of the detective on the stairs, but I didn't use it.

Saul Bass was instrumental in making Vertigo, North by Northwest and Psycho "forever great" on the basis of their opening title sequences alone(along with a hefty collaboration from Bernard Herrmann on music) and Hitchcock DID think enough of Bass to bring him along on Psycho as a "Pictorial Consultant" along with his "Credits By" credit.

And yet: talking to Truffaut, Hitchcock just could not AVOID downplaying Bass's role. Hitchcock didn't share credit much. So here he is saying that Bass ONLY drew a storyboard of the Arbogast murder -- "and I didn't use it." Pretty rotten.

But its worse: Hitchcock gave that answer to Truffaut in 1962, evidently never dreaming that, sometime in the 70's, Bass would show that he drew ANOTHER storyboard for Psycho: the shower murder. And THAT storyboard was published in a film magazine and can now be found lots of places (like on the internet).

Oops, Hitch.

But in some ways, Hitchcock's own lie (about Bass not doing anything on Psycho other than the credits and an Arbogast murder storyboard) turned into a "counter lie" about Saul Bass DIRECTING the shower scene.

Janet Leigh and Assistant Director Hilton Green (now both deceased) swore that Hitchcock directed the shower scene. There is one(and only one) photo of Hitchcock directing the shower scene with Leigh.

Bass said he directed it, but backtracked over time to something I "buy": he was on set when the shower scene was shot, and might have been allowed by Hitchcock to yell "action" a time or two on invdividual shots, and directed some "coverage" with a handheld camera but...Hitchcock approved the storyboard, shot much of the storyboard(but added his own shots)...a "joint effort" that became Hitchcock's.

CONT

reply

And now Billy Wilder comes in. Through film history from what I've read, it seems that Hitchcock was nicer to Wilder than Wilder was to Hitchcock. Hitchcock sent him a congratulatory telegram on "Double Indemnity" and they exchanged playful trade ads based on the Spellbound ad in 1945.

But elsewhere and later, Wilder was less kind towards Hitch: Wilder lived over 20 years after Hitchcock's death and noted in some interview: "Oh, Mr. Hitchcock. I'm glad I don't have HIM to compete with anymore. Always the super-solution, always the corpse." Hmm...a bit jealous?
Elsewhere he said "Mr. Hitchcock is quite good, but he only makes one kind of picture. I make many types of pictures." Oh, fair enough, but we know that Hitchocck found great VARIETY in his thrillers(romance, action, horror -- serious vs more entertaining.) And while Wilder didn't make thrillers regularly, crime and murder figured in quite a few: Double Indemnity, Sunset Boulevard, Stalag 17(a traitor in the camp; killings); Witness for the Prosecution(which Wilder CALLED "My Hitchcock Movie" and which star Marlene Dietrich confused with Stage Fright which she did for Hitchcock.) And gangland murders drive Some Like It Hot. And there are deaths in Wilder's Sherlock Holmes film and his version of The Front Page. In Wilder's final film, Buddy Buddy, Walter Matthau plays a mob hit man.

So you could say that there were any number of corpses in Billy Wilder's films too. A good thing.

Anyway, in this same article where Hitchcock is busted on lying about Saul Bass's storyboards for the shower murder, we get Billy Wilder himself electing to lie in support of Saul Bass. Wilder is quoted in some inteview as being questioned about Saul Bass REALLY directing the shower scene and Wilder says: "Of course he did. Look at the scene. Its not like anything you will find in any other movies of Mr. Hitchcock's."

Really?

CONT

reply

I think that Saul Bass himself said that the "quick cut montage" nature of the shower scene was something that he brought anew to Hitchcock. In which case, unfortunately, evidently neither Mr. Bass nor Mr. Wilder really KNEW Hitchcock's work.

Because these "quick cut montages" are visible in Hitchcock from as early as his silent films and on through his American career starting in the forties:

Saboteur: Bob Cummings fight with Norman Lloyd over the button to push to blow up the ship; Lloyd's sleeve giving way on the Statue of Liberty, thread by thread.

Shadow of a Doubt: The final to-the-death struggle between Young Charlie and Uncle Charlie between cars on the moving train.

Strangers on a Train: The cutting between the out of control carousel and the two men fighting ON the carousel.

Rear Window: The final to-the-death(almost) struggle between Raymond Burr and James Stewart.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (both versions but especially 1956): The "stop the assassination" finale at the Albert Hall concert and in the '56 version, the stab in the back murder of Louis Bernard.

The Wrong Man: Vera Miles crazed swing of a hair brush at Henry Fonda's forehead -- connection, blood.

North by Northwest: the fast cutting on both the drunken drive and the Mount Rushmore sequence; the "slowed down montage" of the crop duster sequence and its final "death moments."

...so by the time Hitchcock reached Psycho, he had done quite a lot of "quick cut montage scenes." It was the CONTENT of this one(bloody butcher knife murder of a naked woman in a shower) and the CONTEXT of this one(alone at a deserted motel down the hill from a house of horrors) that took it to new levels.

CONT

reply

So, Billy Wilder was wrong and so was Saul Bass. Hitchcock had done MANY scenes of this technical nature before.

What a bunch of liars.

Well, they all have their reasons. "Success has a hundred fathers" and Psycho was (ultimately) a success. So Hitchcock wouldn't reveal to Truffaut that Bass drew a storyboard for the shower murder. And Saul Bass would claim that he directed the shower scene. And Billy Wilder(more of jealousy) would contend that Hitchcock did NOT direct the shower scene.

Egos and tall tales drive a lot of people in a lot of industries(try Silicon Valley!) so its not like one ends up "hating" Hitchocck, Bass and Wilder for what they said here. It is more a matter of being amused, and in HItchcock's case, a reason why I may be a fan ...but not a fanboy. I can read where Hitchocck self-aggrandizes his work and refuses to share.

That said, Hitchcock DID give music man Herrman a bonus for Psycho and contended "30 percent of the impact of the movie is due to Mr. Herrmann." And Hitchcock DID invite Saul Bass to do more than the credits on Psycho, and DID give him a "Pictorial Consultant" credit. (But Hitchocck and Bass never worked together again, on credits or posters or ANYTHING, whereas Bass did Otto Preminger's posters for over 20 years.)

Its a mixed bag. Sometimes credit is given, sometimes it is not.

reply

What a bunch of liars.
Well, they all have their reasons.
Ha ha. Lots of famous writers, including one who died last week, Martin Amis, have been *utterly obsessed* with the dark sides of ambition and success in fields that often pose as being very un-business-like or even as fundamentally uncompetitive and high-minded. Gore Vidal's famous dictum that for writers, 'It's not enough to succeed. Others must fail.' is the starting point for Amis and others. Anyhow, *not everyone* in Hollywood succumbs to the temptations of pettiness and spite and feathering ones own nest and subtle undermining of others that's part of the on-going brute competition for attention, collaborators, money, fame, posterity, and all the rest of it, but a hell of a lot do.

Wilder and Hitch probably understood each other's tricks better than most. Both spent crucial time in wild, sexually diverse and free 1920s Berlin (e.g., https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/billy-wilder-in-weimar-berlin ), and both were ready to make bank in Hayes Code America from hinting at the presence of all the sophisticated/sordid stuff that was officially repressed there, i.e., that had only broken out into the open back in Weimar Berlin. And 1920s Berlin was, of course, full of hotshot film-makers and painters and dramatists that young 'uns like Wilder and Hitch (and Siodmak, Ulmer, Zinnemann, and many others), of course, could soak up enormous amount from and would use to their advantages throughout their American and English Language careers.

Somewhat relatedly: I saw a photo from the Cannes film Festival prize-giving over the weekend: QT was handing out the Palme D'Or top award, which was bizarre given that he wasn't on any of the Juries. Cannes strikes me as the ultimate insider house of cards built out of back-scratching and back-biting and personal vendettas!

reply

What a bunch of liars.
Well, they all have their reasons.

Ha ha. Lots of famous writers, including one who died last week, Martin Amis, have been *utterly obsessed* with the dark sides of ambition and success in fields that often pose as being very un-business-like or even as fundamentally uncompetitive and high-minded. Gore Vidal's famous dictum that for writers, 'It's not enough to succeed. Others must fail.'

--

A famous and grim line, that one. And I guess SOME in Hollywood live by it. That Easy Riders, Raging Bulls book is full of such bile. Director Robert Altman and studio guy/producer Don Simpson hated each other; their quotes in that book are awful but Altman had the last laugh when Simpson died of drugs on the toilet: "I'm glad he's gone. I only wished he suffered more." Man, life's too short, guys! (As Don Simpson found out.)

To the contra: we had what looked like some pretty good fellowship among the "movie brats" of the 70s: Spielberg and Lucas and Scorsese and Coppola worked on each other's movies, gave each other points, used the same actors, etc. DePalma was part of that crowd but needed some years to get the same kind of respect(because of his Hitchcock copycatting.) Still: they DID seem to help each other.

---

Anyhow, *not everyone* in Hollywood succumbs to the temptations of pettiness and spite and feathering ones own nest and subtle undermining of others that's part of the on-going brute competition for attention, collaborators, money, fame, posterity, and all the rest of it, but a hell of a lot do.

---

Perhaps as they grew older, fearful bitternesses arose. Wilder saying about the dead Hitchcock: "I'm glad I don't have him to compete against anymore." Elsewhere, when Some Like It Hot and The Apartment hit back to back and the latter won Oscars, Wilder noted that he FINALLY had a bankable name. Prior to then, Wilder noted, "Only DeMille and Hitchcock had name clout at the box office."

CONT

reply

Sidebar:

Netflix is running Billy Wilder's "late movie"(in the dire Tarantino tradition), The Front Page of 1974 right now. It was released at Christmas 1974 by Universal in an attempt to tie into the nostalgia of "The Sting" in the Christmas of 1973. Wilder brought along the insurance of Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau as stars -- but only Matthau was really bankable, and just coming off a trio of thrillers -- Charley Varrick, The Laughing Policeman, and The Taking of Pelham 123 -- that made his Billy Wilder vehicle(from an old 20's play) look that much more dated. The Front Page is OK enough -- the play was solid foundation, Lemmon and especially Matthau were fun. The support cast(including Charles Durning from The Sting, and young Susan Sarandan) was great. The real flaw to the movie was WILDER, who burdened the classic play with his dated re-written lines -- an attempt to be modern with un-hip cussing and clumsy sex jokes and anti-gay humor... WILDER was the problem with his own movie.

And Universal honcho Lew Wasserman figured that out. Wilder's new contract with Universal was summarily ended and he was sent out into the wilderness. Meanwhile, Wasserman kept his old pal Hitchcock on contract and supported for one last film(Family Plot.) I'm sure some of this was Wasserman's loyalty to Hitch as a friend, but also: Universal's ownership of Psycho and the Hitchcock TV series were lucrative and Wasserman KNEW that Universal stood to own the Paramount movies like Rear Window and Vertigo some day. So : Hitchcock IN, Wilder OUT at Universal.

CONT

reply

Wilder and Hitch probably understood each other's tricks better than most. Both spent crucial time in wild, sexually diverse and free 1920s Berlin (e.g., https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/billy-wilder-in-weimar-berlin ), and both were ready to make bank in Hayes Code America from hinting at the presence of all the sophisticated/sordid stuff that was officially repressed there, i.e., that had only broken out into the open back in Weimar Berlin. And 1920s Berlin was, of course, full of hotshot film-makers and painters and dramatists that young 'uns like Wilder and Hitch (and Siodmak, Ulmer, Zinnemann, and many others), of course, could soak up enormous amount from and would use to their advantages throughout their American and English Language careers.

---
Great historical stuff in there, swanstep. Funny, given how quickly Germany plunged into horror by the 30s, that it could have been such a hot and humid breeding ground for great filmmakers, Expressionistic style, and sinful content in the 20s. (I always felt this came back a little when the Beatles kept jumping over to Germany to play clubs and bed strippers in the 60s.)

I guess we can add Fritz Lang there?

CONT

reply

Somewhat relatedly: I saw a photo from the Cannes film Festival prize-giving over the weekend: QT was handing out the Palme D'Or top award, which was bizarre given that he wasn't on any of the Juries.

---

Yeah, but he's really the kind of "star director writer (sometimes actor)" that Old Hollywood was built on.
I sometimes feel a lot of people are missing that about QT. His movies have sick scenes in them, ultra violence and -- more fatally -- large doses of overlong self-indulgence in scene length and dialogue. But the man and his movies "caught a wave" in 1992 that has crested for 30 years and has left him afloat as one of our true superstar directors, "just for the fun of it." (And as with Billy Wilder and Woody Allen, he WRITES his own stuff, all alone, which Wilder did not do.) And I will note: I find those sick scenes and overlong scenes to be flaws in the films but I love ALL the films. He knows what he is doing. He's an entertainer who works with big stars. Kind of like Hitchcock --whom it turns out, QT pretty much doesn't respect at all.

---

Cannes strikes me as the ultimate insider house of cards built out of back-scratching and back-biting and personal vendettas!

---

Yes, well THIS year -- Johnny Depp showed up and THAT started something. He has his supporters, but a contingent of women came on stage wearing shirts bearing Amber Heard's image. (Hey, why give EITHER of them much attention, eh?)

I have found this to be the funniest aspect of Cannes in recent years:

Internet press agents dutifully report that various debut movies and their casts and directors got "a ten minute standing ovation" or "a nine minute standing ovatation" as if this is BIG NEWS when actually it is just the weird star-poking nature of the crowd.

But this backfired: the new Indy Jones movie ONLY got a "five minute standing ovation" -- so it must be terrible. However, STAR Harrison Ford got a "ten minute standing ovation" BEFORE the movie came on.

CONT

reply

So now, the LENGTH of your standing ovation can matter...and can kill you.

Flashback: Hitchcock came to Cannes in 1972 to show Frenzy out of competition . He was accompanied into the event by Princess Grace(after all , it was HER country). There are photos, the former Grace Kelly has trendy long 1972 hair -- you can see the older star she WOULD have been on screen. I wonder what SHE thought of Frenzy?

Anyway, Frenzy got a ten minute standing ovation or something like that, and I always found that to be part of the great "Hitchcock comeback of 1972." But now I'm not so sure. Of the comeback...yes. Of Cannes applause meaning anything...no.

On the other hand: Scorsese and his "Killers of the Flower Moon" got a ten minute ovation this year. And QT and "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" got a ten minute ovation in 2019.

Or something like that...

And: Brian DePalma made a 2002 thriller called "Femme Fatale" which has an opening set piece jewelry robbery AT the Cannes event, it was for me the only real "look inside" at the event, with great big Panavision images of the red carpet and the applauding theater crowd. Worth a watch for the Cannes elements alone.

reply

But its worse: Hitchcock gave that answer to Truffaut in 1962, evidently never dreaming that, sometime in the 70's, Bass would show that he drew ANOTHER storyboard for Psycho: the shower murder. And THAT storyboard was published in a film magazine and can now be found lots of places (like on the internet).

Oops, Hitch.

---

I return with some more thoughts about this.

Some years ago in some book, really good storyboards were printed of the crop duster chase in North by Northwest. The storyboards were perhaps too good: it was clearly Cary Grant's face in them.

Well, I've since read that THOSE storyboards were FAKE, drawn up "after the fact" to promote the movie in some magazine.

And yet: way back in 1973, in a book on Hitchcock called Focus on Hitchcock(which I own), there were some REAL storyboards from the crop duster scene -- just this side of stick figure sketches without Grant being recognizable -- and those were the real deal. Oops: no, they weren't. I just checked. The storyboards were done for an article about the crop duster scene for the book!

Several books on Hitchcock -- notably "Hitchocck at Work," have what seem to be quite legitimate storyboards from Shadow of a Doubt(illustrated as if in an artist's painting) and Lifeboat. So evidently, Hitchcock storyboarded SOME scenes, in SOME movies.

But the issue becomes: how many scenes did Alfred Hitchcock REALLY have storyboarded for his movies? "All the way through the story, start to finish" (as some have contended.) Nah, I don't think so. KEY scenes? (The murders in Psycho.) Yes, I think so.

The Birds got plenty of storyboards for action scenes. I've seen them. And I've seen storyboards for the Family Plot runaway car scene and the cemetary criss-cross(evidently drawn up also for a proposed book on the movie that was never published.)

CONT

reply

Back to Psycho:

These are probably long gone, long torn away, long thrown away, but wouldn't it be cool to see:

ONE: Saul Bass's storyboards for the Arbogast murder? (Would he have matched Hitchcock's great close up of the slashed face of the victim?)

TWO: SOMEBODY's storyboards -- or rather production sketches -- for the Psycho house. I'm willing to bet that Hitchcock ordered five, ten, TWENTY different sketches to give him ideas for the Gothic structure. And finally, he matched those sketches to a set on the Universal backlot -- and made changes.

reply

I believe Marnie was a great success. I liked the subtle hints of what not, i.e.
The sister kisses her brother ' Goodbye ' on the honeymoon send off.

I noticed the sister open the window's shutters just before the wife to welcome Sean Connery home.

reply

I believe Marnie was a great success.

---

Well, it certainly has its followers -- some have called it "the last great Hitchcock movie," and it IS the last time a Hitchcock movie had a Bernard Herrmann score, Robert Burks cinematography, and George Tomasini's editing.

I've ratted myself out upstream as not much liking Marnie -- or rather, I like it the least of Hitch's movies after The Birds -- but it certainly has great moments and it actually might be the only Hitchcock movie to have moved me to tears on two occasions: the killing of the beloved horse, and the "reveal" of Marnie's mother about the letter sweater and her love for her love child Marnie.

---

I liked the subtle hints of what not, i.e.
The sister kisses her brother ' Goodbye ' on the honeymoon send off.

I noticed the sister open the window's shutters just before the wife to welcome Sean Connery home.

---

That was Diane Baker as the sister in law of Sean Connery -- he was married to her sister, but the sister died. And clearly the surviving sister wants Connery bad. Who would not? Uh, Marnie would not, that's who -- and it drives the sister in law NUTS.

Tippi Hedren was famously an unknown who famously made two movies in a row with Hitchcock: The Birds and Marnie. Me, I liked "the other woman" in both movies BETTER: Suzanne Pleshette(The Birds.) Diane Baker(Marnie.) Brunettes with more sex appeal and warmth.

I like the moment when Baker watches Connery and Hedren drive off in their honeymoon car as a man jabbers away at her about money -- her heart is broken and the man can't even see it.

reply

Suzanne Pleshette(The Birds.) was a great actress in Bob Newhart Show and in the film in which she played a stewardess suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder after a plane crash and had to reinact the flight.

reply

Suzanne Pleshette(The Birds.) was a great actress in Bob Newhart Show and in the film in which she played a stewardess suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder after a plane crash and had to reinact the flight.

--

That was "Fear is the Hunter." She made it in 1964, the year after The Birds. Her co-star was ..Rod Hunter, star of The Birds. Hunter played the pilot on the ill-fated flight. Though Glenn Ford had the main lead as an FAA investigator or some such.

reply

It was a great film.

reply