The Men Who Knew Two Much: A Compairson Of Hitchock’s Classic Original And Re-Make Essay, Research Paper

The Men Who Knew Two Much: A Compairson of Hitchock’s

Classic Original and Re-make.

by Chris Sheridan, 1996

The Heroes

The Villains

The Heroines

England and America

Summary

Many works of art can be considered artifacts that hold volumes of information regarding the culture of the

people that created them and the historical context in which they lived.

Films are also treasures of culture, filled with clues and insights into the attitudes and perceptions of the

people of the day. While documentary films obviously present a historical record of people and events,

dramatic fictional movies can also reveal the same. Comparing the main characters in Hitchcock’s 1934

The Man Who knew Too Much with their 1955 counterparts unveils many differences between American

and English cultures, expectations of their women and the pre- and post-war world view.

THE HEROES [top]

The heroes, heroines and villains portrayed in the two versions of the film were drawn quite differently.

Lawrence (1934) was assertive and took control of the situation, while McKenna (1955) seemed to let the

situation control him. When Lawrence got the message from his wife about the cryptic note, he

immediately ran into Louis’ room to get it. He used his resources and wit to get him through sticky

situations, from standing up to the authority of Scotland Yard, to tangling with the dentist to the chair fight

at the church. Lawrence even recruited Clive to do most of the dirty work such as getting a tooth pulled or

being hypnotized by the 7-fold ray.

Unlike Lawrence, McKenna was largely ineffectual and kind of bumbling at times. It wasn’t until the very

end that he actually took any risk when he went to the hitman’s box at Albert Hall and then when he tripped

up Mr. Dreighton on the stairs. McKenna’s wife seemed the stronger and smarter one throughout as she

was suspicious of Louis in Marrakech and later figured out Ambrose Chapel was a place instead of a

person.

THE VILLAINS [top]

The portrayal of the villain was different in both versions as well. In the first one, the villain was singularly

personified in the form of Abbot, but the second film’s villain was shared by the Dreightons and the

foreigner who wanted to become Ambassador. In contrast, the motive of Abbot was rather ambiguous and

only referred to as “the cause,” while the assassination of the Ambassador in the color version was clearly

a means for personal advancement. Also, it was clear from the beginning that Abbot was the bad guy,

even if he was somewhat of a gentleman. However, the Dreightons were more deceptive, both as trusting

tourists in the beginning and later posing as clergy. This difference in the identity of the villain might be

attributed to the post-WWII climate as Russia, America’s ally 10 years previous, was now (1955) our bitter

enemy. What may seem like a friend can turn out to be something very different.

THE HEROINES [top]

Ultimately, it was the depiction of the two heroines and how they reacted to their child’s kidnapping that

revealed the most about their respective cultural values and expectations. In 1934, Jill was a witty and

sardonic Brit who hid her emotions and seemed very independent. At first, she was flirtatious and joked

about Betty being a “little wretch.” After the kidnapping, she was overcome by emotion – but only in the

privacy of her daughter’s room. After much pleading, she was finally convinced by Clive to pull herself

together and be strong before showing her face again. In this scene, Jill’s re-connection with reality was

signified by her noticing that a particular car was on the wrong toy train. This moment seemed almost

liken to the Buddhist concept of living in the now. Another scene just before the final shoot-out showed the

police having a pleasant cup of tea. This is a British characteristic instead of one grounded in the time

context of the Thirties. In times of chaos or crisis, the Brits do not respond emotionally, rather, they focus

on a simple reality such as tea to check their feelings and respond in a clear manner.

Jo Conway, however, reacted to everything in a purely emotional and American way. At first, her female

intuition warned of suspicion about Louis, then McKenna had to give her a preemptive sedative to keep her

from freaking out before he told her of their son’s abduction. The expectations of an American woman in

the ’50’s was that she be pretty and talented, but kept subordinate to her husband, even if he was the

weaker of the two. Despite Jo’s lucrative career and international recognition, she was expected to stay in

Indianapolis where her husband’s medical practice was rather than to re-locate to New York where she

could do Broadway shows.

These two women are further distinguished by the way they treated their children. The nurturing and

coddling way Jo treated Hank became ironic when she blindly trusted the Dreightons with him. Finally, she

helped save Hank by singing to him – another feminine American ideal. In contrast, Jill’s seeming

indifference toward Betty at the beginning turned sour when she was kidnapped and left Jill feeling guilty.

In the end, she was the one who shot and killed Betty’s would-be killer – a normally masculine trait.

ENGLAND AND AMERICA [top]

Overall, the English treated each other in a polite and proper manner. Even Abbot, evil that he was, always

offered food, drink or smoke to Lawrence and rarely did either get upset or show their emotions. This

cordiality was at times fake, perhaps, but nonetheless characterized British behavior not bound by the

time context. In James Bond movies much later, the enemies and 007 behaved in a very similar

gentlemanly manner. The opposing American relationship to an enemy is one of instant hatred and desire

for immediate revenge. Post-war evidence of this attitude could easily be linked to America’s reaction to

the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Right away, the McKennas wanted to kill whoever was responsible for their

child’s capture. Likewise, most contemporary American movies from Rambo to Thelma and Louise have

the hero victimized in some way, prompting him or her to seek revenge – a justification to kill. Even so,

McKenna was further absolved from any guilt for “killing” Mr. Dreighton since Dreighton actually pulled the

trigger on himself as he tumbled down the staircase.

World War II had a profound impact on the way Americans perceive their place in the world. As liberators

of Europe, post-war Americans carried a superior attitude and expected their cultural values to be

recognized in foreign countries while disregarding indigenous rituals and practices. In Marrakech, Hank’s

pulling of the woman’s veil was considered an innocent mistake instead of the desecration of an important

belief that it was. Also, McKenna took lightly the ritual of eating and responded in the typical American

manner by just doing as he pleased by ripping into the meat with both hands, much to the dismay of the

restaurant host.

SUMMARY [top]

To summarize, the main differences between the 1934 and 1955 versions was the way in which the

characters reacted to a crisis situation and the perceived role of the female involved. The English in 1934

did not react emotionally to difficulties when they arose and the woman of the day was expected to be the

strong anchor at home and keep the family together. The Americans in 1955 were very reactionary to

external events and prone to emotional outbursts, while the woman was expected to look nice and not do

too much thinking on her own.

Given the emotionally charged issues that permeate our every day lives in 1995 America, I think I would

prefer more of a 1934 British approach toward dealing with them. While it is very American to lash back

when an injustice is done, as noted by the incredible number of lawsuits and violent crimes on the rise, a

calmer initial reaction might help slow the perpetuation of the victim/revenge mentality that does little to

solve problems. If an American family had a child kidnapped and then responded by making tea, they

would probably be perceived as being cold and uncaring or even weak. However, it takes more strength to

remain calm, and the few minutes it takes to make tea are just as wasted by reacting in a fit of anger.

Neither does much to solve the immediate problem, and a purely emotional reaction can be dangerous,

potentially leading to a regrettable response. Conversely, keeping emotions in check does help make for a

clear head that can be rationally focused on the matter at hand.

There are signs of this calmer approach entering American culture, as evidenced by a particular anti-child

abuse campaign. The PSA shows a parent yelling on the phone, the dog is barking and all the while a

child is screaming. The parent raises a hand to smack the kid, but is stopped in freeze-frame. Then the

voice-over admonishes “Stop, take a breath, and count to 10.” Then the parent does this and instead of

being hit, the child is picked up and hugged.

However, the role of women in 1995 America is a little bit 1934, a little bit 1955 and a lot of neither. The

following generalizations are just that: Today in this society, women are expected to be sexy and smart,

but not too much of either one. If a girl is very glamorous, she is not expected (or desired) by males to be

smart, and women see her as hurting the liberation movement, perpetuating the “object” stereotype. On

the other hand, a smart, assertive woman is often viewed as being unfeminine and bitchy, especially in

the workplace. Hillary Clinton personifies this dichotomy – she was applauded for abandoning the

subservient First Lady role and at the same time criticized for overstepping her bounds. Wonder Woman

is perhaps the only cultural hero to solve this problem. She could be sexy and strong in her little Wonder

Woman outfit and tiara, as well as loyal and subordinate in her glasses as Diana Prince. But she only

succeeded by becoming two people. We still have a long way to go.

?1996 Chris Sheridan

All views expressed are the opinions of the author. Feel free to link to this page. For educational and informational

purposes only.

Back to Essays

Back to Film

www.youknow.com