MovieChat Forums > Topaz (1969) Discussion > Catherine Deneve Met With Hitch To Star?

Catherine Deneve Met With Hitch To Star?

posted 17 years ago by ecarle
26 replies | jump to latest

This year (2007) sees the publication in the U.S. of a book of daily journal entries by Catherine Deneuve, made over the decades of her career.

In October of 1968, Deneuve writes of having lunch with Alfred Hitchcock at the Plaza Hotel in NYC (where Cary Grant is kidnapped in "North by Northwest.")

From memory, I believe that Deneuve writes that Hitchcock was "pleasant and delightful." She doesn't say what the lunch was about, but concludes saying something like "too many movies to choose from."

In October of 1968, Hitchcock was getting very close to starting filming "Topaz."

I can only guess he was pitching Deneuve on the role of Nicole Devereaux -- the blonde wife of Andre. But Deneuve was too young for that part, really. Or too old for the role of Andre's daughter.

Too bad.

[–] mac_alain 17 years ago

I thought that Michel Subor had a great resemblance to Catherine Deneuve.

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

Aside from not being a blonde or as naturally beautiful as Catherine Deneuve, Michel Subor is also a man.

So you are right, a great resemblance indeed.

"Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs." - Nathanael West

[–] mac_alain 16 years ago

Ooops. I meant, of course, Claude Jade.

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

Well, I'm being serious here...Claude Jade's sweet features and pixie-ish smile has less resemblance to Catherine Deneuve than Michel Subor.

"Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs." - Nathanael West

[–] mac_alain 16 years ago

I guess it's in the eye of the beholder. Also, I am thinking of a young Deneuve here.

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

She could have played the role I think. Of course it needs working around but it would have done well. And besides it would have meant greater time between Deneuve and Michel Piccoli who of course starred in the film that made Catherine Deneuve world famous - Belle de Jour by fellow Jesuit, Luis Bunuel.

"Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs." - Nathanael West

[–] ecarle 16 years ago

Yes, the Belle de Jour connection would have been a fine one.

Deneuve is definitely on the list of "Hitchcock blondes who got away," but the problem was really that he simply didn't make movies that she "fit" during their joint time on the scene. "Frenzy" was all-British; "Family Plot" all-American. The "Topaz" role of Nicole is really the only one that comes close to making sense. (Nor would Deneuve, fresh from "Repulsion" in 1965, fit the Julie Andrews role in "Torn Curtain.")

I would tend to agree that Nicole could be "refitted" for Deneuve -- by aging her slightly and saying she was a young mother, etc...

Hitchcock was trying to interest Denueve in the female lead in "The Short Night," a spy story romance he was developing in his last years before retirement and death. I have read a script for that film; the role WOULD have fit Denueve well. Hitch sought Sean Connery for the romantic lead, and Walter Matthau for Denueve's (villainous) husband.

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

Deneuve is definitely on the list of "Hitchcock blondes who got away," but the problem was really that he simply didn't make movies that she "fit" during their joint time on the scene. "Frenzy" was all-British; "Family Plot" all-American. The "Topaz" role of Nicole is really the only one that comes close to making sense. (Nor would Deneuve, fresh from "Repulsion" in 1965, fit the Julie Andrews role in "Torn Curtain.")

But James Stewart and Cary Grant are both far older than Kim Novak and Eva Marie Saint, so they didn't fit either but try casting anyone else. If directors really wanted stars for their films they'd adjust and accomadate just to work with them. And Alfred Hitchcock is just about the most star-struck director in film history. And Catherine Deneuve IS a star. But also an intelligent woman who's stucked with her guns and worked on very few Hollywood movies despite the fact that she could easily have become a big star there. Actresses if they were really great found better acting opportunities in Europe that too among the really good directors than in America.

If Hitchcock signed her on, he'd have fitted the role around her. It's not like he's adapting a great play or a work of literature with a tradition and a life of a character outside the film. For those kind of roles you have fewer choices to experiment with casting.

"Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs." - Nathanael West

[–] ecarle 16 years ago

Agreed, on all counts.

Hitchcock entered a difficult phase with "Topaz."

He'd just had two major box office stars in "Torn Curtain" (Paul Newman and Julie Andrews), and that film had not done well. Hitchcock was blamed...not the two stars... and then in the press, Hitchcock bitterly BLAMED the two stars for ruining his movie ("They were miscast, I lost all hope").

Hitchcock was about to learn: you don't go around bad-mouthing stars in the press.

He wanted all sorts of stars for his final three films. Topaz: Denueve and Connery. Frenzy; Michael Caine and Vanessa Redgrave. Family Plot: Pacino or Nicholson(Dern role) Burt Reynolds or Roy Scheider(Devane role); Faye Dunaway (Black role.)

Once upon a time, Hitchcock could have signed any or all of those major stars. But after "Torn Curtain," he was damaged goods.

Personally, I figure that those new stars (except for Connery on "Topaz"; he'd done "Marnie") were advised heavily by their agents, who probably said: Hitchcock is old and over. No guarantee of a hit or a classic. And he'll blame YOU if his movie tanks. Take this other movie, instead.

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

Well considering he essentially agreed to cast them and then did it...well he certainly handed people a noose to hang him with. Hitchcock was in a bit of a self-destructive phase around that period.

Like Bernard Herrmann. Herrmann made it clear to every director he worked with that he wanted full authority on the music for the films(he was one of the few film composers who also did his own orchestrations) and Hitchcock essentially agreed to that. Then with Torn Curtain, he told Herrmann to make a compromised pop score(like the second rate knock off Addison gave in it's stead) and Herrmann agreed at first and then disobeyed anyway. Herrmann got so mad that he quit, telling him that he had a career before him, he'll have one after him...and he went on to make great music for Obsession and Taxi Driver.

"Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs." - Nathanael West

[–] ecarle 16 years ago

Hitchcock was definitely in a self-destructive phase around that time, but he probably had good reason to be.

Hitch didn't write many letters, but there is a telegram he wrote to Bernard Herrmann going into "Torn Curtain" in which you can practically read Hitchcock's fear that New Hollywood was getting ready to kick him out and that Herrmann's "old-fashioned music" would have to go in the era of Henry Mancini and the creeping-in rock music trends. We have to keep up with the changing times, Hitch cabled Herrmann, "...that is why you get your money, and I get mine."

I'll say this for Hitch: he warned Herrmann. But it was futile. How on earth could you get Bernard Herrmann to become Henry Mancini?

I consider Hitchcock's firing of Bernard Herrmann to be the single most hurtful professional/personal betrayal of his career. Imagine Steven Spielberg firing John Williams! (Or Blake Edwards firing Henry Mancini.)

The sad thing is that I think Hitchcock did it because he was scared that Universal and Wasserman would end his contract. Hitchcock's directorial peers weren't getting work unless they had pretty big names, and even Frank Capra and Billy Wilder found themselves getting flat "noes" from studios as the 60's and 70's arrived.

As for Newman and Andrews on "Torn Curtain," the record reflects that Hitchcock was OK casting Newman, but dead set against casting Andrews. Studio chief Lew Wasserman demanded both stars be cast. Hitchcock -- seething with the same bile that would lead Capra and Wilder to public statements against young Hollywood ("I wouldn't want to be part of these times," snorted Wilder) -- groused about Newman and Andrews to the press. The rest is bad history.

Paul Newman later offered an interesting retort to Hitchcock: "He agreed to have us in his film (true, however "forced.") We were stars and helped bring audiences into the film. We both turned down other pictures exclusively to work with Hitchcock ("The Sand Pebbles," in Newman's case, which got Steve McQueen an Oscar nomination). He owed us some loyalty."

Of course Newman also said that while filming "Torn Curtain": "We all knew we had a loser on our hands."

Some loyalty.

[–] artihcus022 16 years ago

I'll say this for Hitch: he warned Herrmann. But it was futile. How on earth could you get Bernard Herrmann to become Henry Mancini?

But then what Herrmann said regarding Hitchcock's instructions of writing a pop tune is also interesting..."You don't make pop films...so why should I do pop music?"

Hitchcock I felt was too cynical regarding the production of that film and sadly paid the price for it.

Of course Newman also said that while filming "Torn Curtain": "We all knew we had a loser on our hands."

I think he meant the film rather than the director. But I agree with Newman, Hitchcock was too disloyal to his actors on this occassion.

"Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs." - Nathanael West

[–] ecarle 16 years ago

Yes, Newman meant the film. I think he went on to say "so we just went through the motions."

The film is better than that, though, and I personally think that Hitchcock rather toughened Newman up with this role...he'd been mugging and "playing cute" in too many films before it (he's awful doing Cary Grant's "North by Northwest" part in the quasi-remake "The Prize" of 1963.). Hitch literally dragged Newman on the floor through that disturbing "killing of Gromek" scene, and tamped down Newman's impishness.

Hitchcock's break with Herrmann is filled with ironies:

"Herrmann jumped clear just in time" (the movies from "Torn Curtain" through "Family Plot" are considered weak in many quarters, though "Frenzy" was a comeback hit.)

Herrmann COULD have scored all of the Hitchcock movies from "Torn Curtain" to "Family Plot." Herrmann died in December of 1975, having just completed "Taxi Driver." "Family Plot" was scored by then (by John "Spielberg/Lucas" Williams, and it sounds like one of THEIR movies.)

Hitchcock, having broken with Herrmann on "Torn Curtain," could never decide on just ONE composer for the final four films:

Torn Curtain: John Addison
Topaz: Maurice Jarre
Frenzy: Ron Goodwin (after Hitch fired -- more irony! - Henry Mancini.)
Family Plot: John Williams

In a perfect world, Hitchcock and Herrmann would have continued together right through the end. A Herrmann score for "Frenzy" would have been, I am sure, a stunner.

[–] ashtontylo 15 years ago

You two should collaborate on a book!It was a fascinating read!So who were the other "Hitchcock blondes that got away"? I always felt Jean Seberg would have been interesting in a Hitchcock film.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ashtontylo 15 years ago

You are right.I recall an older interview of hers (late 80ies,I think) where she expressed regret for not working in a Hitchcock movie.

[–] ecarle 15 years ago

In addition to "Topaz," Hitchcock pursued Deneuve to appear in a spy movie he worked on for a long time in the years after "Family Plot" and before his death, to be called "The Short Night."

Funny thing: both Denueve and Liv Ullman were rumored for the same part.

Sean Connery agreed to play the hero.

Walter Matthau agreed to play the villain.

But all of the agreements were tentative; Hitchcock was sick and getting sicker.The actors may have just been humoring the old boy. He died before it could be made.

[–] ashtontylo 15 years ago

That's very interesting!Do you know if the project ever got off its feet with a different director and cast?

[–] ecarle 15 years ago

After Hitchcock's death in 1980, actor Elliott Gould, who had befriended Hitchcock in the seventies and had lunch with him from time to time,tried to buy the script for him to star in, and wanted it filmed by another director but called "Alfred Hitchcock's The Short Night."

Universal would not sell it to Gould. The film was never made.

One version of "The Short Night" script was published in the book "The Last Days of Alfred Hitchcock." It is just OK. Hitch was hoping for another "Notorious," but it read to me like there was a risk of another "Torn Curtain."

Interestingly, Hitchcock started work on "The Short Night" in 1970, annoucing it as his next film after "Topaz." But "Topaz" was Hitchcock's second spy movie failure in a row(after "Torn Curtain") and Hitchcock switched to the horrors of "Frenzy" and the fun of "Family Plot" before trying to make "The Short Night" again.

[–] ashtontylo 15 years ago

Very interesting!Thanx for posting.

[–] ecarle 15 years ago

You're welcome. Its nice to be able to share this stuff I have read.

BTW, at the 1979 American Film Institute salute to Hitchcock, Deneuve and Liv Ullman were not there, but Walter Matthau sat not too far away from the aged Hitch, and Sean Connery got up to say hello. So two possible "Short Night" stars were at least near Hitchcock in his last year.

[–] ashtontylo 15 years ago

I suppose that the closest Deneuve came to being part of a Hitchcock movie was "La sirene du Mississipi" directed by Truffaut who appreciated Hitchcock's work enormously.Adapted from Cornell Woolrich's novel,"Sirene" is strongly reminiscent at certain moments of "Vertigo".

[–] ecarle 15 years ago

Yes, that's true. I think, following "The Bride Wore Black" also from a Woolrich story, that "Missisipi Mermaid"(as it was called in the states) was Truffaut's "Hitchcock picture."

Well, wait: Truffaut said that his "Farenheit 451" was meant to be Hitchcockian, too, and it had a Bernard Herrmann score. As did "The Bride Wore Black."

"Mississipi Mermaid" was remade not too long ago, I think with Angelina Jolie and Antonio Banderas in for Denueuve and Jean-Paul Belmondo.

[–] ashtontylo 15 years ago

You are right.I had completely forgotten about that film."Original sin" or something.Though both of them stunning (Jolie and Banderas) there was no chemistry between them as far as I recall.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]