'Rope' (1948) - Film Review

Figure 1 – Rope (1948) [Poster]

This review analyses Alfred Hitchcock’s well-known mystery drama Rope (1948), explicitly concentrating on Queer theory and how this relates to the characters actions and portrayal within the film. Referring to the work of Richard Dyers’ publication “Queer Noir.” Queer Cinema: The Film Reader (2004), David Greven’s article entitled ‘Making a Meal of Manhood: Revisiting Rope and the Question of Hitchcock’s Homophobia’ (2012), and Kael, Pauline book ‘Taking It All In’ (1984). This review will explain briefly what Queer theory is and identify the different ways in which this theory applies the characters within the film.

Two young men, Brandon and Phillip share a New York City apartment. Both consider their self to be intellectually superior to others including their close friends. In order to prove this, the two decide to murder their friend David. Together, Brandon and Phillip strangle him with a rope, then hide the body inside an old chest. They then host a party at their apartment, inviting guests that include David’s close friends and family, along with their old schoolteacher Rupert, from whom they erroneously took their ideas from. Leading Rupert to then slowly, begin to suspect the two. (Imdb (N/A))

Queer theory is a term first coined by Teresa de Lauretis. Who created a publication in the feminist cultural studies journal differences titled “Queer Theory: Lesbian and Gay Sexualities” (1991). In which she explains the theory with it combining with other subjects: “refusing heterosexuality as the benchmark for sexual formations, a challenge to the belief that lesbian and gay studies is one single entity, and a strong focus on the multiple ways that race shapes sexual bias.” (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (2018)). All subjects intertwine with the concept of rebelling against society’s normalities, in this case usually around the topic of sexuality. In particular heteronormativity, which is clearly implemented within the film Rope, showcased through the characters of Brandon and Phillip and their relationship during 1940s America.

From the beginning of the film, audiences are left to question the relationship of the two main characters Brandon and Phillip. Looking through a 21^st century lens allows us to see clearly the relationship between the two is hardly a platonic friendship. 

The two characters are shown to the audience in a way in which their characters display that of a gay stereotype. “Both male and female queer stereotypes assume that homosexuals are a particular kind of person.”  (Dyer, Richard (2004)).  Although Hitchcock never explicitly depicts their homosexuality, it is still shown through the characters stereotyped personas. Viewers learn throughout the duration of the film that Phillip is a character who is submissive towards Brandon, resulting in him being easily dominated and manipulated by Brandon, traits that could then be characterised as effeminate. This is also supported through his interest in playing the piano, leaning towards more of an artistic path than other professions often being seen as “feminine”.  

Figure 2- Phillip playing the piano Bovberg. J. (2012)

Not only was this shown through their personalities, but it was also depicted through their apartment surroundings. At a very early stage in the film, it is presented to the audience Brandon’s fascination for the finer things in life with his extravagant paintings that fill the apartment. “When homosexuals were despised, there was a compensatory myth that they had better taste than anyone else” (Kael Pauline (1984) Pg. 335).  Although many of the guests did not particularly like Brandon, they would take a fancy to his views on the paintings he had acquired. This does not only show his stereotyped tendencies but also the power he feels he has over others in that he feels he is superior to those, who cannot have or afford these luxuries. “That’s the difference between us and the ordinary men, Phillip.” (Brandon, 1948).

Figure 3 – Paintings in the apartment 1 Bolder. M. (2011)

Figure 4- Paintings in the apartment 2 N/A. (1948)

A clear depiction of the two defying the norms of society in the 1940s was the two murdering a man. “David Kentley’s body transforms, in a not altogether metaphorical form of cannibalistic frenzy, into a ritualistically consumed sacrificial object. Brandon and Philip make a meal of straight manhood” (Greven. D. (2012)) This means that the dead body symbolises a deeper meaning then just a body, it reflects the two characters rebelling against the idealist view of men in America during the 1940s. The body also acts as a metaphor for the secretive queer male. Throughout the premise of the film, David’s body is enclosed within a case (like closet), that is then used a table in which the guest dines off. In this case, the eating threatens to remove the fabric of the social order, stripping back to the lies that the two lovers are then feeding the guests that goes against the demands, and desires of them. (Greven. D. (2012)).

However, in contrast to this, the character of Rupert almost represents the idea of societal normality of the 1940s within the film. “Rupert almost allegorically represents the forces of normalization, repression and containment” (Greven. D. (2012)), which goes against the ideologies of queer theory. This is shown through him being the authority figure of the two men, bringing them out of their wild fantasy of murder and to justice. This could be seen as the two having to conform to society’s normalities during the 1940s and supressing their feelings and desires. Yet it could be argued that these ideas were first created from their relationship with Rupert and the ideas he taught them about others being superior. This could reflect queer theory in that it argues at birth we are not given any labels or stereotypes it is fed to us through society.

To conclude, Brandon and Phillip represent Queer theory in its truest form in which they are compressed under the societal normalisation, in which forces the viewer to seek through a one-shot perspective, the truth of their relationship, resulting in the rebel against those norms through murder.

Bibliography

Dyer, R (2004). “Queer Noir.” Queer Cinema: The Film Reader. Harry Benshoff & Sean Griffin. New York: Routledge, 2004. 89-104.

Greven. D. (2012). Making a Meal of Manhood: Revisiting Rope and the Question of Hitchcock’s Homophobia. Available: https://www.colorado.edu/gendersarchive1998-2013/2012/12/01/making-meal-manhood-revisiting-rope-and-question-hitchcocks-homophobia  Last accessed 19/01/2019.

Imdb. (N/A). Rope plot. Available: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040746/plotsummary Last accessed 19/01/2019.

Kael, P. (1984) Taking It All In. New York: Henry Holt & Co, Pg.335

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (2018). Queer Theory: A Rough Introduction. Available: https://guides.library.illinois.edu/queertheory/background  Last accessed 19/01/2019.

Harvard Illustrations

Figure 1 – Rope (1948) [Poster] Movie Poster Shop. (1948). Rope (1948). Available: https://www.moviepostershop.com/rope-movie-poster-1948. Last accessed 19/01/2019.

Figure 2- Phillip playing the piano Bovberg . J. (2012). Hitchcock Conversations: “Rope” (1948). Available: http://www.jasonbovberg.com/hitchcock-conversations-rope-1948/ Last accessed 19/01/2019.

Figure 3 – Paintings in the apartment 1 Bolder. M. (2011). Alfred Hitchcock's 'Rope', 1948. Available: http://mollybolder.blogspot.com/2011/02/alfred-hitchcocks-rope-1948.html  Last accessed 19/01/2019.

Figure 4- Paintings in the apartment 2 N/A. (1948). Rope: The Poverty of “Superior Human Beings”. Available: https://liberalironist.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/rope-the-poverty-of-superior-human-beings/  Last accessed 19/01/2019.