"I say, that's not my club tie now is it?"

Whenever we think of the body of work produced by Alfred Hitchcock, most of us think of the films he made in the forties, fifties, and early sixties. We tend to think of Hitchcock's work in Hollywood's golden age. It's generally assumed by a lot of people that after 1963's "The Birds", Hitchcock never made a good film.

This perception is inaccurate. While Hitchcock never had a big hit after "The Birds", he still made a couple of pretty good films. 1964's "Marnie" was an intriguing, though imperfect psychological thriller. And 1972's "Frenzy" is a superb man-on-the-run thriller that can stand up to the best of Hitchcock's work. Its commercial failure is perhaps the only reason it is not as well remembered as "Psycho". I consider it to be Hitchcock's last great film.

I remember well the day I first saw "Frenzy". The film had a particular resonance with me because A) like Blaney I'd just been fired by my sadistic boss, and B) it was around this time that accused serial killer Robert Pickton had been arrested. Pickton is the man accused of murdering dozens of women from Vancouver's downtown East Side over the past few decades. Vancouver had its own serial killer problem until recently.

The film begins with a stunning tracking shot of London with a boat's exhaust dirtying up the ravishing sights. A man is giving a speech to a group of Londoners standing by the inlet. The man is giving a speech about how the city intends to restore the sites of old London and clean up the industrial waste from the water.

His speech is rudely interrupted when one person notices something floating in the inlet. It's the naked body of a woman who has been strangled. A necktie is dangling from her neck. It's here that we learn a serial killer dubbed "the necktie murderer" has been targeting women across London. He rapes women, strangles them with his necktie, and then dumps their body somewhere in London. The murders have London residents in an uproar as the police have been unable to find the killer.

Enter Richard Blaney. Richard Blaney is a ill kempt, foul tempered ex-RAF officer. Blaney has just been fired from his job as a bartender for drinking on the job and, more importantly, for his relationship with Babs Milligan, the woman his boss was making moves on. Angry and out of work, Blaney goes to visit his friend Bob Rusk who manages a fruit stand in Coven Garden. Blaney proceeds to whine about his troubles.

After blowing his money on alcohol, a slightly drunk Blaney goes to whine and complain to his ex-wife. Blaney's ex, Brenda, manages works as a counselor, bringing singles together into a relationship. The irony being that being a counselor does not guarantee a permanent marriage. Blaney gets into a mild argument with his ex, overheard by Brenda's bookish secretary. The two make up over dinner at Brenda's country club where Blaney whines some more at Brenda. Being a counselor is an unforgiving job. Blaney spends the night at a homeless shelter.

The next day, Brenda is paid a visit by a "Mr. Robinson" (not his real name). Mr. Robinson is one of Mrs. Blaney's most persistent clients, one which Mrs. Blaney has made clear she cannot help. You see, Mr. Robinson is looking for women with "certain peculiarities" (never specified, but they can't be good). Brenda continues to insist that Mr. Robinson cannot be helped. But Mr. Robinson will not take no for an answer. And when Mrs. Blaney continues to be defiant, Mr. Robinson decides to take Mrs. Blaney as "his girl". As Mrs. Blaney learns too late, "Mr. Robinson" is actually London's necktie murderer and he's decided to make Mrs. Blaney his next victim, or his "sop-up lunch" as he puts it.

Because of his argument with Mrs. Blaney, and because he was seen leaving the site of the crime (he was trying to return some money Brenda had given him), Richard Blaney becomes the prime suspect. On the run from the law with only his girlfriend Babs as his ally, Blaney must elude the police while trying to prove his innocence. However, the search to find the real killer will take Blaney uncomfortably close to home.

"Frenzy" was Hitchcock's first English film made in over two decades, and you can sense Hitchcock's affection at getting back to his roots. Hitchcock's father was a greengrocer on London's East End where Hitchcock grew up. The whole film seems to be an affectionate look at London, even as it depicts London's darker side. British flavour abounds throughout with characters speaking in a precise, formal fashion uncommon for those of us on this side of the Atlantic. In an interesting tidbit, the DVD documentary tells a little story of an old friend of Hitchcock's father who met Hitch during the shoot.

I liked Hitchcock's brilliant framing of several sequences. One is when we follow Babs and the killer up to his apartment. Then the door closes, and the camera slowly backs away down the stairs and out the door. It is left to our imaginations what is happening to Babs, which is how it should be. I wish Hitchcock had done something like this when he filmed the first murder. There were a couple of other brilliant shots. One is when Mrs. Blaney's secretary heads up to the office of her recently murdered employer and we wait down on the street to here her reaction. Another was when the camera rests just outside the courtroom where Blaney is on trial. We can only here what they're saying in the courtroom when someone opens the door, otherwise we watch to see the reactions of the people.

"Frenzy" was the first of Hitchcock's films to get an "R" rating in the U.S. In the years before, Hitchcock was forced to tone down the violence in his films to meet the production code, but now with the seventies in full swing, Hitch could indulge himself more. Indeed, the entire film is much more violent and graphic than anything Hitchcock has ever shot before. If you thought the shower scene in "Psycho" was graphic, it's nothing compared to the horrific rape and strangulation of Brenda Blaney. This film is definately not for the faint of heart.

One of the ways "Frenzy" differs from previous films is the fact that the hero, Richard Blaney is not very likeable. Indeed, as the film progresses Blaney becomes less and less sympathetic. This is probably not an accident, the point in depicting him this way is to show why everyone thinks he is a killer. We quickly become convinced that Blaney is certainly capable of the crimes of which he is falsely accused. "Frenzy" is not just a man-on-the-run thriller, it's also a cynical look at the primitive instincts of men. Most of the men in "Frenzy" are violent or unsympathetic while the women are the victims of male rage. It's interesting to compare Blaney and the killer. On the surface they are polar opposites. Blaney is a dirty selfish man angry at the world, while the killer is well dressed, polite, and always ready to help people. Yet underneath, both Blaney and the killer are immature people who can explode into rage at any moment, the killer is simply able to disguise his devious tenancies, a la Norman Bates. "Frenzy" is perhaps Hitchcock's darkest film.

Hitchcock manages to add some much needed humour to the proceedings. The police inspector assigned to the case has his own problems to deal with. His eccentric wife has taken up continental cooking, or what passes for it anyways. Some of the meals she cooks include quail with grapes, which resembles a miniature corpse with eyeballs. Another meal has a fancy continental name which disguises the fact that it is really a pig's foot in orange sauce. I've never tried continental cuisine, and I don't think I ever will after watching this film. Inspector Oxford must find ways to dispose of these hideous meals while his wife is not looking. The problem has become such that the inspector has taken to eating his English breakfast at work in order to offset the coffee and croissant he had at home. Despite her oddities, it's the inspector's wife who first casts doubt on Blaney's guilt.

There's also a darkly humourous sequence where the killer must retrieve a bit of incriminating evidence from one of his victims. The killer had placed the body in a sack of potatoes, then dumped the sack in the back of a truck full of potatoes. While searching each of the sacks, the driver returns and drives off. The killer must deal with various indignities like potato dust, the lurching of the vehicle, holding back sneezes, and getting the victim's foot in his face. Most gruesome among these is when he must break the fingers of the victim to get the pin she is holding. Corpses are never very cooperative.

There are some echoes of previous Hitchcocks here and there. The scene where the killer must retrieve the pin reminds me of a similar scene in "Strangers on a Train" when Bruno must retrieve Guy's lighter from a drainage vent. There's also the scene where Blaney sneaks up to the killer's apartment to get his revenge, only to find another corpse. This scene brings to mind both the climax in "Psycho" where Lila heads to the cellar, and the scene in "Strangers on a Train" where Guy sneaks into Bruno's father's mansion.

I particularly liked the ending to the film. Instead of having a big climax where everything comes together, Hitchcock chooses to end on an abrupt note that is satisfying, yet leaves us just a bit unnerved. With the dark tone sustained throughout most of the film, it seems appropriate to end on a note that is satisfying, but not too happy.

One minor complaint. The film states that Blaney was in the RAF, yet Blaney is clearly stated as being in his thirties. How can that be? This is 1972, Blaney would have only been in his early teens during World War II. Whoever wrote the film (Peter Shaffer in this case) wasn't paying attention.