Hitchcock's Spellbound: Stylistic Analysis

"Hitchcock also uses point-of-view editing with the camera moving with a walking character. The nature of the movement of the camera gives this different feel to point-of-view editing from a moving car: I call it track-and-reverse point-of-view editing. A point-of-view editing shot tracking forward with a character shows what she/he is looking at, this is then followed by a reverse-angle shot of the character which tracks back in front of her/him-in the direction of movement-as she continues to walk forward".

                                                                                                                      (Walker, 419)

"If the Spellbound dream sequence is firmly rooted in the Dalinian universe, the nightmare contrived by Hitchcock and Ferren was emblematic of the pure visual cinema that the director advocated: a parade of images without words..."

                                                                                                                       (Paini, 168)

'Perhaps there are ten thousand people who haven't forgotten Cezanne's apple, but there must be a billion spectators who will remember the lighter of the stranger on the train, and the reason why Alfred Hitchcock became the only poete maudit to meet with success was that he was the greatest creator of forms of the twentieth century, and its forms that tell us finally what lies at the bottom of things; now, what is art if not that though which forms become style".

                                                                                                                       (Jean Luc Godard, 11)


Francois Truffaut:...I hope you won't be offended, but I must say I found the picture (Spellbound) something of a disappointment.

Alfred Hitchcock: Not at all. The whole thing's too complicated, and I found the explanations toward the end very confusing.

                                                                                                                         (Truffaut, 120)

Spellbound (1945, Alfred Hitchcock) was made during Hitchcock's Hollywood filmmaking period in which his formative influence and creative partner, David O Selznick, was his producer. Hitchcock started to establish his career in creating the psychoanalytical framework of murderous stories in the beginning years of working with Hollywood studio system(started in English period). In fact, the characteristic Hitchcockian desire to stimulate the moral, the intellectual and the psychoanalytical responses in audience's attraction or repulsion to cinematic text can be detected and revealed stylistically in films such as Spellbound. His style which has associations with German directors' expressionistic interest to use the camera movements and Russian constructivists' theories of editing such as Eisenstein's attraction montage can be compared with regard to classic Hollywood continuity editing. Moreover, point of view shots in Hitchcock's films, one may remark parenthetically, are often used to epitomize on his stylistic approach to present 'look', and the prolonged and the detailed shot of each look and its object of desire which lingers on the screen is formulated on his temporal definition of each cut with respect to Eisenstein's static and dynamic articulations.



Hitchcock and perhaps Selznick's interests to depict the psychological depths of human mind in Spellbound could only be grasped and attained by developing a kind of style in which the power of look and the object of desire determined the intensely evocative cinematography of the film. Of course, in order to objectify and highlight the anatomy of voyeurism and exhibition, he had no choice to use a stylistic choreography of editing and camera movement by which the psychoanalytical element of the cinematic text could be brilliantly emerged and flourished through the point of view shots which simultaneously characterized the romantic suspense classic genre of the film. As so frequently occurred with Hitchcock, his ultimate instinct was to go beyond the authoritative constraints and restrictions which were imposed by the studio system. Ultimately, the prospect of launching his style as well as bolstering his opportunities to do business in America forced him to create a kind of specific analytical framework in which seeking for formalistic representation of content was significantly crucial in his offering the methodological and stylistic analysis of the situations in mise-en scene.



From the beginning of the film, Hitchcok's analytical montage which gets closer and closer to mental asylum at (1:27-2:13) establishes his reputation as the montage director. At (2:23-2:32), he creates his first composition in depth of the film that ends to the dissolve and the camera movement along the corridor. Of course, his narrative progress is still fundamentally established and governed by the conventional continuity editing of Hollywood studio system such as shot/reverse shot at (3:11-3:15), 180 degrees rule at (3:23-3:48), action/reaction shot at (4:04-4:35) , eye line matching and matching on action. Though he usually moves his camera in the form of pan, lateral tracking, dolly in dolly out, it seems in the first glimpse that it is not important for Hitchcock as the montage director to develop the style of his camera movements to the degree in which the aesthetic of the camera movement can be discussed and analyzed in broader view among the train viewers and critical writers. But what makes Hitchcock's film such a complex examination of his stylistic camera movements is precisely his affinity to practice German  expressionistic technical achievements that can be referred to many of his films during his career in America. Although most of the camera movements and pans in Spellbound follow the characters such as the shots at (7:13-8:08), (21:25-21:32), (33:00-33:05), (34:51-35:01), some camera movements such as the shots at (10:30-10:48), (33:37-34:46) and (38:38-38:50) are aesthetically designed to get closer to subject to give more information about the event. Moreover, the combination of the camera movements and the subjective point of view shots which can be considered as a part of Hitchcock's style are used in the film to create the visual paradigms of the suspenseful moments such as the shots at (20:36-20:42) and (1:34:20-1:34:23). Not only does the desire to use the combination of camera movement and point of view shot go back to the visual structure of the sequences directed by Hitchcock, but even in Salvador Dali's animated dream, one can detect Hitchcock's stylistic approach to visualize the combination at (1:23:34-1:23:52). A corollary to this paranoia of the gaze is the fact that the objects, because they are filmed in close ups, become aligned with the character's point of view and take on a decisive narrative and aesthetic power such as the parallel lines in Spellbound at (25:16-25:24) and (55:36-55:40).



In terms of editing, Hitchcock's desire to use eye line matches at (10:48-10:59), (14:10-14:21), (18:37-18:46),(19:01-19:14) may perhaps draw viewer's attention to their similarities with the subjective point of view shots. In other words, if Hitchcock firmly believed that his style is relied on representing the character's subjective point of view shots and this is what was important to him, the viewer couldn't be surprised by his will to shoot the tremendous amount of eye line matches which can be almost compared stylistically with the point of view shots in terms of look and its object of desire. The decision to use the eye line matches prevailed even as a fundamental principle among other Hitchcock's films too. In Spellbound, there are the eye line matches  in (23:46-23:49) and (38:08-35:14) which can be very similar stylistically to the point of view shots. Hitchcock's fascination of using point of view shots in his films drives him to the point in which he finds eye line matches in a way better than point of view shots to make Spellbound as an artistic work. Hitchcock's visual manifestations and vocabulary to design the complexity of each shot in Spellbound and David O. Selznick's domination and cooperation convince him perhaps to work with Hollywood conventional style of editing rather than to create new experimental works of montage which can have associations with constructivist forms of art. In fact, Spellbound is not considered an amazing piece of art among French film critics and directors such as Truffaut and Godard in 1950s and in 1960s in terms of representing stereotypical formalism of Hitchcock's artistic creation. Though, there is a dissolve in Film at (24:47) on Bergman's profile that shows Hitchcock's affinity for surrealistic movement and the relation of the shot with Rene Magritte's painting: The Unexpected Answer (1933).

Not only does Hitchcock combine the subjective point of view shots with the camera movements, but he intertwines and connects more than one point of view shot together in order to play with the spectator's expectations such the shot at (8:57-9:03)in which camera transfers our view from Bergman's point of view shot to the same one from other psychiatrists' in the same building, or when Bergman looks at Peck who looks at the parallel lines at (1:05:05-1:05:09). It seems that Hitchcock attempts to experience the new formalistic approaches in Hollywood conventional method of point of view shots at (21:50), (22:40), (23:05-23:06) between Bergman and Peck that raise the question about their similarity with eye line matches, at (23:05) Peck is standing on his foot while at (23:06) the look of camera is still represented from his previous point of view shot. Of course, some point of view shots are absolutely conventional such as (28:02) and (32:38-33:05) that give some verbal information of the plot to the spectator. But Hitchcock's approach to combine the point of view shots together or with the camera movement and the dolly in such as the shots at (1:26:01-1:26:06) has truly the impression that Hitchcock is being profoundly drawn into his desire to create the new experimental and aesthetic forms of the traditional and conventional way of filmmaking in Hollywood. Not surprisingly, at (1:14:18-1:14:29), it seems that he attempt to bring the change to conventional form of shot/reverse shot by forcing psychiatrist character to turn around inside the frame, or at (1:10:16-1:10:19) and (1:11:00-1:11:05), he uses two pans (perhaps 90 degrees) in two different orientations without moving the location of camera in order to create very important point of view shot at (1:11:10-1:11:26) through which Peck drinks the glass of milk while the screen from his point of view shots becomes white.



Not only are the most of the dollies in done very often to draw the spectator's attention to what happens in the frames, but the most of the long takes such as the shots at (14:57-16:27) and (1:18:19-1:21:31) are not aesthetically very important because of their associations with the conversations and the dialogue scenes. Hitchcock would often use the conversations in the long takes to convey the intellectual or the emotional feeling of the sequence to the spectator. But as a filmmaker who has desire to reflect the architecture of the story cinematically, he shows little regard for theatricality of the scene which has nothing to do with exploring new techniques and new creative tools: "You see, the point is that you are, first of all, in a two dimensional medium. Mustn't forget that. You have a rectangle to fill. Fill it. Compose it...when I am on the set, I'm not on the set...I am looking at a screen"(Bagdanovich, 515). Hitchcock, as one of the greatest inventors of form in the history of cinema, appears to be the director who has less fascination with the long takes that can not be referred to any formalistic and aesthetic experience in cinematic text. For Hitchcock, the real time that is experienced by the spectator is the one manipulated by montage and established by the suspenseful sequences. Therefore, the real long take is the one which is created inside the spectator's perception of cinematic moment. The moments that can expand or contract the time flux experiences by the spectators are Hitchcockian ones. If Hitchcock was the creator of the universe characterized by formalism and visual narrative, his audiences could be referred to psychological evolution of time as the main concept of the plot.



Ultimately, Hitchcock's composition in depths at (12:37), (15:19), (36:54-37:23), (38:11-38:25),(44:41), (47:11), (48:52), (58:27), (59:36-59:48), (1:10:18) and (1:25:36) should come as no surprise, then, the director od Spellbound should perceive and experience the depth of field as a kind of experimental attempt which has nothing to do with his reputation as montage director. Of course, Hitchcock continued to examine aesthetic representation of composition in depth as the fingerprint of his legendary touch to the suspenseful moments. For example, at (1:10:18) Hitchcock put the razor blade close to the camera in foreground while the psychiatrist's presence is felt in background or at (1:25:36) in which Peck is close to the camera while psychiatrist and Bergman are looking through the window to the snowy weather outside. Hitchcock usually put objects close to the camera to intensify their importance and presence in the mise-en scene which such as the shots in (58:27) in which telephone is the closest object to the camera (very similar to Orson Welles' style). The possibility of creating depth of field even in close up is another example of Hitchcock's aesthetic attempt to play with the conventions of narrative. At this close up, (47:11), Peck's profile in the left side of the frame is a bit out of focus because of its closer position to the camera, but Bergman's face is in focus and located almost at the background.



The entire film appears constructed around Bergman's fascination for Peck and Peck's mental sickness that, of course, is related to the power of look. In other words, in order to control the space, the characters have to watch their own surroundings and try to communicate with the characters and the objects around them. No one can oppose Truffaut's discontent and dissatisfaction with Spellbound for Hitchcock's using lots of dialogue in his film and his choice for peck who is not Hitchcokian acto, but it should not be forgotten that the film such as any other Hitchcock's films always hinges on the spectator's physical vision and his mechanism of look has association with Hitchcokian montage aesthetic. It simple means that even in Spellbound, Hitchcock's visual poetic effects are undeniably present and explicitly impressionistic and influential in terms of representing stylistic narrative visually and aesthetically.





Bagdanovich, Peter. Who the Devil made It: Conversations with Legendary Film Directors New York: Ballantine Books, 1998.

Godard, Jean Luc. Histoire Du Cinema Paris: Gallimard/ gaumont; New York: ECM New Series, 1998.

Paini, Dominique et Guy Cogeval. Hitchcock and Art: Fatal Coincidences Montreal: The Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, 2000.

Truffaut, Francois. Hitchcock New York: Simon and Schuster, 1967.

Walker, Michael. Hitchcock's Motifs Amsterdam: Amasterdam University Press, 2005.


By: Morad sadeghi