I love this movie so much

Absolutely amazing

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Your blood may run cold, but you now find yourself pinioned to the story.

MARNIE is a psychological thriller as a kind of imbalance in relations of human nature, the past and the future. The two characters, one is provocative and other is seductive, are engaged in a dangerous game woven of love, passion and madness. It is based on the 1961 novel of the same name by Winston Graham.Marnie is a a compulsive thief who cannot stand to be touched by any man. Her new boss, Mark, is, in a strange way, fascinated by her behavior, to such an extent that he blackmails her into marriage when he stumbles onto her breaking into his safe. A dangerous and passionate game, based on a dark past and an uncertain future, can begin...Hitchcock's psycho-physical game, which is full of symbolism, is again very shocking. A lack of love and the impossibility of expressing the same, with constant disguise and deception, bring enough amount of intrigue. A strong sexual desire and frigid wife are kind of bonuses in this story.What's the problem with this film?I think, a serious dose of obsession, with the two main characters, which fully corresponds to their mysterious psyche is too sweet, and sticky for a psychological thriller. This is especially felt in acting. Simply, Hitchcock's thematic compactness is lost and psychological game becomes a bit tiresome to watch.There is of course, "Spellbound", as a kind of warning.Tippi Hedren as Margaret "Marnie" Edgar is a young woman who constantly suffers from nightmares, afraid of thunder and one color. A kleptomaniac is not aware of causes of her behavior and her fears. So the best. However, a thief becomes prey. Sean Connery as Mark Rutland is a widower, a zoologist and hunter at the same time. He is not a perfect man, regardless of his appearance and "mission". He is a man, who likes challenges in a form of attractive woman with serious psychological problems, who somewhere in her depths cries out for his help. Diane Baker as Lil Mainwaring is Mark's former sister-in-law, who will try to bring a discomfort into a romance, which practically not exist. Louise Latham as Bernice Edgar is a distant cold and mysterious mother. She is a wound that needs to be cleaned.I will repeat one of my sentence. I have a feeling that I watched pretty good movie where something's wrong.

To find out that Bernardo Bertolucci, the director of Last Tango In Paris, loves Marnie makes a lot of sense, to me anyway. If you think about it, Last Tango In Paris could have been a Hitchcock movie. An American in Paris meets a young girl, they have sex without knowing anything about each other and ends up in murder. Marnie is truly perverse and Sean Connery's obsession for Tippi Hedren is infinitely more perverse than whatever poor Tippi Hedren suffers from. He is turned on by her rejection. The kiss during the gelid honeymoon stays inches away from necrophilia. right?. The script is just delicious. Sean Connery goes for the troublesome center of his character, yes he does, whether consciously or unconsciously. Tippi Hedren is terrific here and with all the things we know now about the making of the movie her performance has acquired some extra something. Diane Baker as the scorned sister in law is a delight. So here we are, talking about a movie made 53 years ago. Time does extraordinary things.

Sad but true, the master had lost his touch with MARNIE. And that sentiment comes from a Hitchcock fan.MARNIE doesn't even try hard to delve into pure cinema (with neurosis as its MacGuffin); the director simply "phoned it in." Hitchcock's call included directions for mixing the following ingredients: Mysterious blonde? Tippi. Charming leading man? Connery. Plot? Boy meets girl; boy loses girl to mental dysfunction; boy finds girl via amateur psychiatry. Cinema stuff: Make the screen awash in red to signify alarm. Move the lens in and out to highlight an object, e.g., money, to give the viewer a dizzying thrill (which proved more annoying than anything). For suspense, follow Marnie stealthily walking away from an unsuspecting washerwoman with one of her shoes inching its way out of her pocket.No, Alfred gets an F for this one. He'd become the directorial shadow of himself, ironically, having foretold that eventuality with his hallmark profile that opened of his TV series. MARNIE is blarney.

This is the point at which I feel Hitchcock begins to lose his touch a bit, at least for the films I seen so far. MARNIE is somewhat of a departure in the type of film he had made his name doing, but even so, it contains themes that resonated through his body of work. The story is about Marnie (Tippi Hedren), a compulsive thief and liar who ends up marrying a man she robs. This was an intriguing premise, to say the least, and provided the opportunity for Tippi Hedren to play a more complex character than she had in THE BIRDS, but I don't think she was quite up to the task. Sean Connery was appropriately dashing in his role as Mark, the man she ends up falling for, but he didn't really have that much chemistry with Hedren, in my opinion. For me, there were individual moments or flashes of brilliance that worked rather than the film as a whole. In particular, the opening sequence where we are introduced to Marnie was well-done, and the scene where she robs Mark's company was the closest the film ever came to capturing the suspense for which Hitchcock is so well-known. The rest of it was a mixed bag. Some of the psychological elements were interesting by themselves, and in a few scenes, were well-utilized. However, the sledgehammer approach to Freudian themes and associations removed a lot of the mystique. It also didn't help that the explanation for Marnie's particular idiosyncrasies at the end was rather unsatisfying. Still, there were a number of things I did like. Tippi Hedren played cold and calculating rather well. Bernard Herrmann's score and main theme was very romantic and fit the character of Marnie. The film was also handsomely photographed, had great sets and costumes, and made good use of color. Overall, though, I feel like MARNIE has some poor pacing, is a little too long, and has as much trouble identifying what it wants to be as Marnie herself. Before I watched this, I took a look at the theatrical trailer, and even Hitchcock had difficulty (it seems) really pinning down what the film was (settling on 'sex mystery'). Certainly one of Hitchcock's lesser efforts, it still has some interesting parts despite the unevenness of it all.