The Collaborators, 5th Edition

Try to contain your excitement! Alaina (of That's What She Read) and I are returning yet again for another collaboration, but this time the choice did not come down to me. Poor Alaina has suffered enough with Redwall, our previous collaboration. If you haven't checked out her bookish blog, I suggest you do because she reads some pretty great and different books herself. That's why I put my complete trust in her ability to come up with something we not only both own but are both willing to read together as well.

All right, @NYCBookWorm84, here are your options for March (there are 4): 1) Strangers on a Train by Patricia Highsmith
— Alaina Patterson (@WillBeFunOrElse) March 13, 2014

@WillBeFunOrElse you had me at Strangers on a Train! I'm down for that one!
— Erica Drayton (@NYCBookWorm84) March 13, 2014

@NYCBookWorm84 Dammit! All that typing gone to waste! Cool - I'll let you know when I'm ready to start. :D
— Alaina Patterson (@WillBeFunOrElse) March 13, 2014

Can't have gotten more simple than that! It's like Alaina has come to know me so well! And because she picked a winner right away I feel it only fair that I mention what her original other 3 choices were: 2) Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy by John LeCarre, 3) 1st to Die by James Patterson, & 4) Farewell My Lovely by Raymond Chandler

I almost changed my mind when I went to B&N last week and came across this section:

But, there are still plenty more collaborations for us to have this year and judging by the covers of these books (which I've been basing my choice of reading material on a lot lately) I'd say I'm game for any of these in the coming months! ::wink wink::

In the meantime, she and I will begin reading Strangers on a Train by Patricia Highsmith early next week!

I instantly was excited that she mentioned this book first for several reason actually!

1. I absolutely love this movie, directed by Alfred Hitchcock in 1951, starring Farley Granger and Robert Walker. This movie also features Alfred's daughter Patricia Hitchcock!

2. I had NO idea this movie was originally a book. I know this is silly of me since more than 95% of movies usually originate from a book! I am ashamed...

3. This year I have several "turned into a movie" books lined up to read so it's only fitting that I should add this one to my list.

Have you read any Hitchcock films? Or have you seen this movie? If not, allow me to share the trailer cause, for me, it's easily one of his best.



To follow along with us on Twitter search for #TheCollaborators or simply follow us!

Alaina - @WillBeFunOrElse

Erica - @NYCBookWorm84

Rear Window (1954) (Movie Review)

Title: Rear Window

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

Screenwriter(s): John Michael Hayes

Producer: Alfred Hitchcock

Distributor: Paramount Pictures

In Theaters: August 1^st, 1954

Run Time: 112 minutes

Color: Technicolor

Starring: James Stewart, Grace Kelly, Wendell Corey, Thelma Ritter & Raymond Burr

Genre(s): mystery/romance/thriller

Storyline: Professional photographer L.B. “Jeff” Jeffries breaks his leg while getting an action shot at an auto race. Confined to his New York apartment, he spends his time looking out of the rear window observing the neighbors. He begins to suspect that a man across the courtyard may have murdered his wife. Jeff enlists the help of his high society fashion-consultant girlfriend Lisa Freemont and his visiting nurse Stella to investigate.


Movie Trailer:


My Review: This time I traveled to another borough to see this movie. I went to BAM! and it was a gorgeous theater, on the outside. The actual theater was small and intimate but I actually prefer it that way because you feel that much closer to the screen without sitting in the first few rows (which I also prefer to do).

This movie is a part of a series of Grace Kelly movies BAM! is showing from July 13^th – July 26^th. Of the movies they have elected to show this one is the only one they showed over a 6 day span. To me, that speaks volumes.

Hitchcock loved his blondes, Grace Kelly especially. She starred in several of his movies, including Dial M for Murder and To Catch a Thief. The latter is being shown (and I will be attending) at BAM! as well this coming week.

For this movie however, I feel like Stella, played by Thelma Ritter stole the movie. She has the best one liners and delivers them with such grace and style it’s hard not to easily understand the generation she hales from and agree with her. She is a walking, talking, fortune cookie, or as L.B. Jeffrey’s points out, Readers Digest.

While some might watch this movie and be fearful of their neighbors and probably more attentive as to their surroundings, I feel the opposite. The whole atmosphere of seeing so many different worlds just by gazing out your window. How was L.B. supposed to know a murder would be taking place?

As usual in most of his films, Hitchcock makes a cameo appearance in the movie. If you don’t want to know where, skip this paragraph now, but if you do, read on. The piano player who owns the studio apartment across the way from L.B.’s window, at one point, has a visitor. At first the man’s back is facing the camera but if you know Hitchcock you know more than just the silhouette of his face. Once he turns you can see it is indeed him. I imagine he is a prospective manager or record producer who is visiting the single bachelor to hear him play a piece he has been struggling throughout the movie to finish.

I won’t spoil the movie’s ending but I will point out the way in which the camera angles are used in this movie. Hitchcock was one of the first directors to experiment with camera movements and placement more than anyone else. There is no angle used today that Hitchcock hadn’t tried in one of his movies at least once. This movie is no exception.

Until Hitchcock came along I imagine there was no clear definition for the word suspense. Hence why he is the master of it.

My Rating: A

TCM Presents...Dial M for Murder (1954)

Title: Dial M for Murder

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

Screenwriter(s): Frederick Knott

Producer: Alfred Hitchcock

Distributor: Warner Bros.

In Theaters: May 29th, 1954

Run Time: 105 minutes

Color: Warner Color

Starring: Ray Milland, Grace Kelly, Robert Cummings & John Williams

Genre(s): crime/mystery/thriller

Storyline: In London, wealthy Margot Mary Wendice had a brief love affair with the American writer Mark Halliday while her husband and professional tennis player Tony Wendice was on a tennis tour. Tony quits playing to dedicate to his wife and finds a regular job. She decides to give him a second chance for their marriage. When Mark arrives from America to visit the couple, Margot tells him that she had destroyed all his letters but one that was stolen. Subsequently she was blackmailed, but she had never retrieved the stolen letter. Tony arrives home, claims that he needs to work and asks Margot to go with Mark to the theater. Meanwhile Tony calls Captain Lesgate (aka Charles Alexander Swann who studied with him at college) and blackmails him to murder his wife, so that he can inherit her fortune. But there is no perfect crime, and things do not work as planned. Written by Claudio Carvalho, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Movie Trailer:


My Review: I never have nor do I believe I ever will, see an Alfred Hitchcock movie I don’t like. He truly is the master of suspense. Many try to copy him, all have failed. To try and enter his mind to find out why and how he does what he does is impossible. His ability to draw his audience into this world he creates for us with such simplicity of character and dialogue and story is brilliance. There is too much flash and graphics today that the true art of movie making is gone. Hitchcock knew how to draw out the best in his actors so much so that their surrounds were often inconsequential until you saw what he wanted you to see.

This movie was probably one of Hitchcock’s least favorites. If not for his having Grace Kelly in this movie, whom he adored, as much for her blonde hair as for her acting ability. Why was it his least favorite? Well, because Warner Bros. insisted he film the entire movie in 3-D. Back in the early 1950’s 3-D cameras were huge and not easily moveable. I’m sure this would have annoyed Hitchcock who just about pioneered the idea of moving around a camera in ways no one ever thought possible. He would have had very little say-so on how a scene would be or could be filmed. And honestly, I still don’t see the appeal of a 3-D movie with real people. Simply because I would never want to own a 3-D television so the only time I would see it as such would be if I saw it in the movie theater. Every time I see this movie and remember it was filmed in 3-D it does answer a lot of visual questions. You wonder why certain scenes were filmed on that angle? For the purpose of 3-D. But then you find yourself looking for all the instances where a person or an object would have that 3-D affect and I can never remember them all. Only the one shown on the movie poster actually.

Aside from the 3-D aspect, which you will never see unless they remaster and rerelease the movie as it was intended to be seen, it was a great story as told. The idea that a man should want to kill his wife in order to inherit her money is not a new one. It’s been gone over countless times in books, movies, and television shows. Hardly ever does the husband get away with it. Yet, the arrogance of a man shows through in spades when the idea enters their minds and they try it anyway. In this movie Ray Milland is the has been tennis pro who is living off his wife’s money. Back then, a man living off his wife, I thought, was not something to be ashamed of? I thought it wasn’t until much later that men developed pride and a spine and wanted to make their own money and way in the world? Maybe I’m wrong. In any case, the idea of how he could murder his wife and not get caught enters his mind. First there must be blackmail since he himself would not be killing her. There must be an alibi. And there must be a perfect time and place to commit what seems to be the perfect murder. He thinks he’s got everything working for him. No matter what hitches should come up, like his wife’s lover, whom he knows about, dropping in for a visit,  he is more than able to role with the punches. Even coming up with a plan B when his original plan of killing his wife doesn’t happen. You see, if she is convicted of murder, then being her husband, he would become sole heir of her estate. But I’m giving too much away already.

All I ask is you try and solve the murder before the chief inspector reveals it all in the end. I promise you, it’s not an easy case to crack. How does the chief inspector figure out that the wife is innocent and that in fact the husband is the guilty party? It’s all in the details…

My Rating: A